[Peace-discuss] Welcome home

[Karen Medina]

Trust me, it will be obvious who we are without any signs.

In fact, they are likely to think we are there in greater 
numbers if we don't take any identification. Look how many 
AWARE members they thought were at the City of Champaign 
Township meeting! I love it! They think we are everywhere in 
huge numbers. I really really like this.

-karen medina

---- Original message ----
>Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 16:55:52 -0700 (PDT)
>From: Ricky Baldwin <baldwinricky at yahoo.com>  
>Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Welcome home  
>To: kmedina at uiuc.edu, peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
>
>Unfortunately, time makes these things clearer only
>for people who have the time or inclination or ability
>to research facts.  Most people either do not want to,
>or can't, or can't readily.  They get their info from
>people whose job it is to tell them what to think, to
>avoid the threat of democracy.  That's one reason what
>we do is so important.
>
>On the welcome home, I do think it's a good idea for
>us to participate, but not as unidentified individuals
>who will be assumed by everyone including the media to
>be there to join the rah-rah for the war.  I'v ebeen
>thinking about this since it came up in Urbana during
>the discussions on the City Council resolution.  
>
>I'm not proposing a protest.  There's no way I can
>imagine, at least not yet, a protest on that occasion 
>communicating anything other than disapproval for the
>individuals returning. No, what I'd suggest is more of
>a "presence", with signs more along the lines of - off
>the gleaming top of my head - "Welcome home - from the
>peace movement" with a peace sign.  I'm sure there are
>better ideas for signs.  But I'd propose that the goal
>is to communicate as sincerely as we can that we, as
>anti-war activists, are honsetly glad they are home
>and hope they all get home safe - ASAP.
>
>It's a rare opportunity.  If we don't go, many people
>will always believe that we were always insincere in
>our opinions, as Carl said Tuesday, that we are not
>against the troops, but the best way to support the
>troops is to bring them home.  If we do go, and it
>bothers anyone, we simply say, we're just here to
>welcome them home.  Why identify ourselves as peace
>activists?  Because otherwise nobody would know that
>peace activists also welcome home the troops.
>
>Moreover, I think we should apply to become an
>official cosponsor of the event(s) in both cities and
>make public our support along the lines I just
>outlined.
>
>My 2c.
>Ricky
>
>--- Karen Medina <kmedina at uiuc.edu> wrote:
>
>> >From: "C. G. Estabrook" <galliher at uiuc.edu>  
>> >As we heard at the township meeting Tuesday night,
>> myths
>> about Vietnam are being used to defend our
>> aggression in Iraq.
>>  --CGE
>> 
>> Can someone explain to me how so many different
>> interpretations of Vietnam can still exist? The
>> interpretations mentioned Tuesday evening were very
>> odd to me.
>> I would have thought that several years of hindsight
>> would
>> have made the interpretations clearer.
>> 
>> -karen medina
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Peace-discuss mailing list
>> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
>>
>http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss
>> 
>
>
>__________________________________________________
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection 
around 
>http://mail.yahoo.com