The Importance of Being A Protester

Whenever activists protest, the debate is invariably sparked about the effectiveness of protests or direct actions. Some think that protests serve little purpose, and others argue that protests, and especially direct actions, do more harm than good.

The latter argument is quite problematic. The argument is that by disrupting people's lives, protesters or those partaking in a direct action alienate people who may be sympathetic to their goals or message. However, it is equally likely that people who would not have otherwise known about the protest, or might not have normally joined, might join in the protest. Speaking empirically, at the Chicago march on Wednesday, March 19, I was personally able to bring three or four people into the march from the sidelines. When I asked a pair of girls to join, they seemed surprised. "Oh, can we?" they asked, and when I told them that they could (and should), they willingly joined the group. If this were repeated down Michigan Avenue, as I have no doubt that it was, the march would have swelled from the just the people at at Federal Plaza to an even larger size as people from the sidelines joined in. Thus, the cost of alienating some people must be weighed against the benefit of having new people join the movement.

Additionally, protests and direct actions garner press attention. With the current state of the media, the antiwar movement needs all the media attention it can get. Before the 4,000 deaths and upsurge in violence in Iraq, the occupation had declined in both public opinion and media coverage. Thus, especially in times when the media is scarcely covering the war, protests serve an important role is brining it back to the forefront of the wider public's attention.

Along those lines, protests and direct actions serve as important symbolic ways to bring the war home. By interrupting the flow of normal life, protesters force people to confront the issue, something that rarely happens. This can prove effective, although one must be careful not to go overboard - the case of the "Holy Name 6" event which happened on Easter in Chicago. While I personally support these protesters, I feel that their actions might have caused more harm than good - although it certainly created great media attention and got people talking!

In answering common arguments against protesting, I have already begun stating benefits to protesting. It creates media attention, it creates discourse about the issues, and it forces people to confront the issue in a way that they normally are not forced to. Protesting does much more than just this, however.

Protesting can create tangible change. Public approval is critical for politicians, so they do pay attention when the people take to the streets. While national protests are the biggest, they also need to be, as they are, frankly, the least likely to actually create change. Local protests can easily create local change, and from these grassroots larger change can spread. This is not an argument against large national protests, however. National protests create national media attention, and can create large scale change. The important thing is to not be discouraged if a protest does not cause immediate change. We cannot think of the antiwar movement - or any movement of such a scale - in the short term. This is a long term struggle, and in it every protest is an important tool to the movement.

Finally, protests can help curb the omnipresent problem of Burnout. In my experience, protests are some of the most invigorating thing that one can do. As long as one understand that protests are the means to a long term end, and not an end to themselves - and, importantly, as long as one understands that protests are unlikely to bring about immediate change - protests can be incredibly fun and extremely energizing. They give you a sense of your own power, both as an individual and as a group, and it allows people to see the size of the group. Often, activists are unable to see the "big picture" because of either geography or the nature of people - many are willing to take to the streets to protest, but not to the planning room to figure out the logistics. By immersing oneself in large groups, one can truly gain a sense of how powerful The People are.

So, take to the streets. Be it a protest of 5, 50, 500, 5,000, or 500,000 - and I have been to a range similar to that - get out and take to the streets. Show them what Democracy looks like and show that what Democracy sounds like.

Whose Streets? Our Street. Whose War? Their War.

April showers...

Well, spring break is over and April is gearing up to begin. A number of old adages spring to mind: the fact that March is in like a lion, and out like a lamb seems to be holding true this year, so we shall only see if April's showers do indeed bring May flowers (which, in turn, are set to bring pilgrims).

Aside from showers, however, April is shaping up to be UIUC CAN's busiest month ever! We have protests, rallies, conferences, and vigil all in the works! It's amazing to think that in one short year CAN could have grown so fast, but that seems to be exactly what has happened, and our current membership is amazingly devoted!

So, without further self-congratulations, I present to you UIUC CAN's April Schedule!

On Friday April 4th, we will be hosting a a candlelight vigil to mourn and commemorate the American and Iraqi deaths thus far. Join us at 8:00pm at the Alma Mater (intersection of Wright and Green) for this remembrance. We will have candles, but if you wish to bring your own, that would be groovy.

On Saturday, April 12th at 2:00 local High School will be staging a Die-In at the corner of Wright and Green. Come out and support these young activists, especially if the weather is nice.

Friday April 18- Sunday April 20 is our much-hyped CAN Midwest Conference! We would love for you to join us as we trek out to the University of Iowa at Iowa City for a weekend of workshops, activism, parties, famous speakers, culminating in a massive protest through Iowa City! For more information, contact Pete Rhomberg at prhombe2@uiuc.edu or call him at (708) 828-9926. And remember: other RSOs are more than invited! We want this conference to be for anyone who's opposed to this occupation!

Finally, CAN is planning some sort of demonstration on May 1st, the 5th anniversary of President Bush's now infamous "Mission Accomplished" speech. Detail will be forthcoming as we figure them out, but mark your calanders!

College Not Combat - Troops Out NOW!

How many more?

They've finally hit 4,000 US troops killed in Iraq. This is on top of the over 1 million dead Iraqis, millions of displaced Iraqis, and literally uncounted killed private military contractors.

Now, maybe more than a quarter of Americans will be able to correctly identify the number of Americans troops killed.

And then we have Bush saying that these deaths will not have been in vain (so we must stay in indefinitely), and Cheney "supporting" the troops by explaining that they volunteered, so it's OK that they died.

yes we CAN!

We needn't kid ourselves: Barack Obama is the more likely Democratic candidate to win the nomination, and when he does so he is rather likely to win the general election as well, if only because there is such a strong backlash against Republicans. Now, CAN doesn't endorse any politician as a matter of policy, but in an election year it is impossible to be an activist and at the same time ignore the ramification of candidates - especially if one is an antiwar activist.

I wasn't deep in the antiwar scene in 2004, when Kerry was running. I was opposed to the war, of course - I had been from the get-go - but as a Junior in High School, I was simply an individual opposed to the war, not connected with any group. I supported Kerry for the same reason many did - because he wasn't George W. Bush, and because ANYONE was better than Bush.

Unfortunately, this trend was mirrored in the antiwar community. The movement died down to a simmer as the efforts of the politically minded were directed to expelling Bush & co. from office. The student antiwar movement also fell into a lull, proving quite disheartening to many members.

For the antiwar movement on the whole, this is becoming the case once again. MoveOn.org has endorsed Obama for the presidency, and has devoted its efforts to electing him, away from the antiwar movement. Many people, either believing the myth that the "surge" is working or simply trusting the Democrats to get us out of Iraq in 2009, have also dropped out of the antiwar movement. Protests this year - the 5th anniversary of the war - were markedly smaller than they were last year.

However, all this is counter intuitive. If we have learned anything from the 110th Congress, it's that the Democrats - brought into power by a strongly antiwar electorate - has refused to take the steps necessary to bring an end to the war. The Democrats do not, of course, bear sole responsibility for this failure of leadership - the Republicans and the Administration have stonewalled and vetoed every measure to bring the troops home - but the Democrats have also not used their considerable political capital or clout to stand up to the Administration (excluding the current admirable fight they are putting up over the FISA fight), not has the Democrat-controlled 110th Congress used it's power of the purse to cut funding for the war, forcing the President to withdraw troops.

However, 2008 is shaping up to be a different year than 2004. As I've already mentioned, the antiwar movement is definitely taking what seems to be a hiatus - going into it's election year lull. However, on the student front, the antiwar movement is really heating up. CAN is growing at an ever increasing rate, and after during incredibly successful (and incredibly powerful) Winter Soldier testimonies, Iraq Veterans Against the War had so many requests to join that their server couldn't handle the load. Additionally, groups like the RNC Welcoming Committee are gearing up to make sure the war remains in the public eye - and is brought home to average Americans - when the media descends on Minneapolis/St. Paul for the Republican National Convention. While the antiwar movement as a whole might be waning, the student and veteran resistance is on the rise, with little sign of abating.

Thus, the obvious question needs be asked: Why? In a year when the population as a whole cares less about the war than ever before, why is the youth movement picking up steam?

I attribute it to a number of different causes. First, we have had the past three years (since the last presidential election cycle) to build a solid movement. For many in CAN, myself included, the antiwar movement is our first experience with taking part in a movement, much less building one. Here in UIUC, we have already experienced the pitfalls and joys of building a chapter from scratch, and learning as we go. The process creates a very organic and, I hope, democratic structure, but it also takes a lot of work and time before it can get off the ground. In 2004, CAN was much younger than it is now, with much less experience. The antiwar movement in the 1960s was able to draw on the success of the Civil Rights struggle - the modern student antiwar movement has no such recently history from which to build from, and thus we must rely on our own initiative and ideas.

However, this is also a blessing in disguise. It is my firm belief that in a few short years, a number of critical crises will afflict this country, from the environment to renewable energy, from healthcare to education to social security. Each of these will require capable activists to organize the movements around them, and the important building that we do now in the antiwar movement can hopefully prove a useful framework for future student activists. This is the benefit, and the burden which we willingly shoulder, of being on the vanguard of a new generation of activists.

Which brings me to my second point. Why was there no prior movement from which the modern student antiwar movement could draw on? For this, I blame "Generation X", the generation that grew up in the 1980s. They rejected the protests of the previous generation, and are stereotypically thought of as the "Me" generation - more concerned with their own well being than with larger social issues.

This new generation, however, is slowly coming back around to the idea that students and citizens in general can change the world for the better, and that direct actions and protests are an effective way to bring about change. The cause of this change? Frankly, in recent years I think much credit goes to Barack Obama.

Many in the antiwar movement - myself included - disagree with Obama. While he may now claim that he will withdraw troops within 6 months, many people feel that this is simply a ploy to win over primary voters, who typically are thought 0f as firther left than the general populace. Many still in the antiwar movement expect him to change his tune if and when he becomes the nominee for the Democratic Party.

However, Obama does have a very powerful message. His speeches and message of hope resonate with the younger set, and his chant of "Yes, we can" has caught on and resonates across the country and through the packed venues where he delivers his speeches. This message - and his incredibly Kennedyesque charisma - has not only energized students and youth, but has also (possibly subconsciously) put the idea that students can change the world into the minds of the youth. This makes Obama supporters - many of them college students - prime candidates to take the next step and become activists. It is much easier to convince someone to join a movement if they are already coming from a framework that affirms their ability change the world.

As more students flock to Obama's camp, it should be the job of the student antiwar movement to actively court these individuals. As mentioned earlier, CAN supports no candidate, because we believe that anyone opposed to the war - be they far right isolationists or far left pacifists, religious fundamentalists or fervent atheists - is and should be welcome within CAN. Thus, while many of us may reject the cult of Obama as nothing more than a charismatic veneer over what will be effectively "business as usual", we must recognize the incredible opportunity before us, and put our politics aside to work to build the strongest antiwar movement this country has seen since Vietnam.

And although it may not seem like it, we are well on our way there. In 1971, Vietnam Veterans Against the War presented the original Winter Soldier, featuring 100 former soldiers testifying about what they saw and did in Vietnam. By then, America had been fighting fiercely for 7 years (if we use the Gulf of Tonkin incident as a starting point - it should be noted that America had been involved for 4 years prior to that). In 2008, 5 years into the illegal occupation of Iraq, IVAW was able to present the testimony of over 200 soldiers, as well as the testimonies of Iraqi civilians and international journalists.

So take the spirit of Obama's message to heart - not as an ambiguous "Yes we can!" but as a strong and firm "Yes we CAN!"

College Not Combat - Troops Out Now!

Peaceful march for Tibet in Chicago ends with broken window at consulate

I love watching the news now that I have time. And even though the U.S. news is not that good, they sometimes report important things. Though this isn't about Iraq, it is important and relevant to the protests we have done and will continue to do in the future, because we can learn from this as to what is eye catching. Also, this issue has to do with human rights, which is always important, but relates to what the U.S. is doing to the Iraqi people and what our government is doing to our own people as well. The issue also has to do with allowing outsider media sources into Tibet to report what is actually happening there, a problem that we have in the U.S. as well (as it relates to Iraq, Darfur, etc.). Also, just to make me happy, the protesters wish to strip China of the 2008 Olympics, something that will make it apparent that the world will not support the genocide in Tibet or Darfur, both of which China is supporting. We must learn from these issues and realize that C.A.N. goes beyond Iraq, and into more human rights issues.

McCain Visits Iraq to Meet With Officials

I find this interesting that two Iraqis are interviewed and one thinks that McCain is great to keep promises to the Iraqi people, and another reports about the abhorrent conditions Iraqis have to deal with. I guess it has to do with which group is on the U.S.'s side that day... This is important because it shows McCain's evil policy to keep this war going, and most likely extend it throughout the middle east.

Clinton Attacks Obama, McCain on Iraq

I was watching the wonderful "news" at home today, and saw this wonderful statement that Clinton was making about Iraq and how she is the best candidate for the issue. Though her statements are noble, and certainly correct about McCain and Obama, according to ontheissues.org, she hasn't really had a concise decision on what to do in Iraq:

Withdraw all combat troops: one or two brigades a month. (Feb 2008)
Calling for troop withdrawal pressures Iraqi government. (Feb 2008)
Some tactical success in Iraq, but no strategic success yet. (Feb 2008)
Would have never diverted attention from Afghanistan. (Jan 2008)
Bush must ask Congress to approve agreements with Iraq. (Jan 2008)
GovWatch: Withdrawal in 60 days has no timetable to finish. (Jan 2008)
After 9/11:Those helping terrorists would feel "wrath" of US. (Jun 2007)

Americans. Don't. Torture.

One of the most irritating aspects of the Mr. Bush's administration (aside from all the other irritating aspects) is the insistence that the interrogation technique that America condemned when it was used by the Khmer Rouge - namely, water boarding - is now not only legal, but absolutely necessary to conduct the "War on Terror" ("War of Terror" might be more apt). With the wingnuts and Administration officials screeching about the "Ticking Bomb" scenario, many people also buy into the idea.

The are a number of problems with Mr. Bush's recent veto of a bill that would prevent the CIA and other groups from using water-boarding and other torture techniques.

First and foremost, waterboarding IS torture. The Japanese and Gestapo used the technique in World War II. And early form of it was used during the Spanish Inquisition. Most famously, it was used by Pol Pot's Khmer Rouge. US troops used it in Vietnam, but they did so illegally - during that other failed act of aggression 40 years ago, the generals designated the technique illegal.

Which brings me to the next point. Not only is waterboarding torture - and thus illegal under the Geneva Convention - but it is also illegal under US law. The fact that Mr. Bush has made it
legal by fiat - presidential signing statements and executive orders - shows how little respect he has for the Constitution and seperation of powers. Perhaps he never saw School House Roch as a child, but only Congress can make the laws, and the President cannot enact a line-item veto, which is effectively what his use of Presidential Signing Statements amount to. The truly egregious part is that he has not been hauled before Congress to at the least testify. We as a country have slowly moved from outrage over the actions of this Administration to apathy, as it becomes expected that the Executive can do whatever he or she pleases.

Thirdly, waterboarding and torture do not work. Let me repeat: waterboarding the torture do. not. work. People subjected to torture will say anything to have the torture stop, whether they know anything or now. Additionally, the "ticking bomb" scenario - the idea that we need to be able to torture, in case there is a bomb in a major city somewhere and the only choice is torture or destruction - is pure Hollywood fantasy. Such events might happen in 24, but in the real world they are not only unlikely - according to experts, "Ticking Bomb" scenarios are impossible.

Even if such a scenario were to occur, torture would not help. In order to obtain useful information from suspects, an interrogator needs to build a relationship with the suspect, which takes weeks. Psychological attacks work much more effectively than physical abuse.

The list could go on. The fact remains that Mr. Bush cannot veto a bill banning waterboarding because waterboarding is already illegal and immoral. The bill should never have gone through Congress in the first place: they had already passed an anti-torture bill a few years ago. What Congress should have done was object to Mr. Bush's signing statement on that bill - which effectively turned a bill designed to close loopholes into a massive loophole on the question of torture.

However, the political ramifications of this act - if it is properly publicized - could be enormous. While the Republicans will couch the veto in the language of National Security, the Democrats - if they are clever - will beat the Republicans over the head with this veto. I am no fan of the Democrats, mind you. I just desire some remuneration for what will be 8 long years of law breaking, illegal war, and the erosion of the economy. I say, send the war criminals off to the Hauge and let them answer for their crimes before the international community.

So it begins again

The BBC has reported today that a station commander in Britain suggested that members of the RAF not wear their uniforms in public because of verbal abuse from people opposed to the Britain's involvement in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Slowly, then we can see the resurgence of the Vietnam myth: that antiwar activists hate the troops, that we spit on them or deride them, or verbally abuse them. Antiwar individuals run the gamut in their opinion about the troops, or the army, but on the whole the antiwar movement is, and has been, incredibly supportive of individual soldiers (especially veterans) while at the same time being incredibly critical of the system that creates soldiers - a position that is in no way contradictory.

We stage counter-recruitment events not out of a hatred of the troops, but out of a hatred of the war and the current Army, and out of a desire to keep more young men and women from the trials and tribulations of armed service.
This particular incident strikes a chord with me, based on an event that happened just yesterday while on the Quad, tabling for our Week of Action. An individual began a heated debate with us about how he had family over in Iraq, and how what we were doing was disgraceful. In his mind, antiwar activists since Vietnam have opposed the troops, and the troops have in turn opposed the antiwar community. While debating individuals can be cathartic and fun, it also does tend to reflect poorly on us when we are tabling. Shouting at people on the Quad makes us seem quite hostile, more radical than we are, and frankly, unapproachable and unfriendly. People like that will not be swayed in the two minutes we spend yelling at them, and in that time we may very well loose others who might have come out. I am not, of course, saying that we should not have civil discussions with people with whom we disagree, and I fully expect shouting to be a part of that. But when we table, I feel that discussions should try to be as civil as possible.

The idea that the antiwar community and the community of active and veteran soldiers are set at odds is, of course, a falacy, but one which unfortunately continues to exist. Education is the best way to combat this issue. By working closely with IVAW, we are able to show people that the antiwar community respects the veterans. By counter-recruiting, the antiwar community shows that it respects and values lives more than the Army does. By showing educational films - such as Sir! No Sir! and The Ground Truth - the antiwar community is able to show that we have a history of supporting the veterans and the troops, and that the myth of spitting on vets is just that - a myth.

A number of weeks ago, a fellow student told me that he really supported a sign that I had in my window for some time: "Support the Troops, Bring Them Home." He, like many others, has been taught only the myths of the antiwar movement, and he told me that the sign showed him that on the whole the antiwar movement is made up of normal people, and not fringe radicals.

Now, I won't say that such "verbal abuse" never happens, nor will I say that it never will happen. However, happily Brown's government has come out decrying this claim as rediculous, and the report mentions that no reports of such actions have been filed.

We must all be active in our rejection of the myth of the antiwar movement as a movement that is also opposed to the veterans, both in our words and in our actions.

Week of Action and Vets

So our chapter is going to have a busy week next week. For the 5th anniversary of the war in Iraq (over a decade longer if you include sanctions and air strikes throughout the 90's) UIUC is on Spring Break. Therefore we decided to move our Week of Action forward a week. We have so many great events going on and so many dedicated members to help with it; our CAN chapter has come a long way from only a year ago.



Monday:
"Winter Soldier Film screening with Iraq Veterans Against the War"
Location - Illinois Disciples Foundation (IDF)
610 E Springfield
7:00 pm

Tuesday:
Counter-Recruitment protest at the new recruiting stations in Champaign
507 Town Center Blvd
4:00pm - 6:00pm
http://uillinois.facebook.com/event.php?eid=22160478088

Wed:
Lunch Lecture and Discussion on the Antiwar Movement at Hopkins Dorm
12:00-1:00

Thurs:
Walk-out, March, Rally, and Die-in on the Quad hosted with the Campus Greens.
11:00am - 1:00pm
Quad side of the Union
http://uillinois.facebook.com/event.php?eid=10419805759

Friday:
Live streaming of "Winter Soldier: Iraq and Afghanistan" with Iraq Veterans Against the War
Time - 6:00pm - 8:00pm
Place - TBA

Saturday:
Continuation of the live streaming of "Winter Soldier: Iraq and Afghanistan" with Iraq Veterans Against the War
Time: 3:00pm - 5:00pm
Location: TBA


I think my favorite events will be the ones on Winter Soldier! In 1971 the first Winter Soldier was held as a way for Vietnam veterans to stand up against the racist, illegal, and genocidal war of Vietnam. It ended up boosting the antiwar movement into the main stream and which in turn helped bring Vietnam to an end. Now there is a modern day Winter Soldier being put on by IVAW Iraq Veterans Against the War. It's happening the whole weekend of March 14-16! Our CAN chapter has a few people attending as invited guests because we work very closely with IVAW. A few of us who are staying behind are inviting the public and any remaining students to watch a live online video feed of the modern Winter Soldier. I encourage everyone who reads this to do the same.

All you have to do is go to www.ivaw.org and poke around some until you find it. You can watch a trailer for it right now on their front page! Here are the first few minutes of it.

I think it's just so inspiring that this is going on and has the potential to boost both IVAW and CAN into the national view of the antiwar movement. IVAW is bigger than VVAW when they held the first Winter Soldier. And CAN is bigger than SDS (the main grassroots antiwar organization from Vietnam) was in their earlier stages.

This just really gives me hope for the kind of movement we are trying to make. A movement that:
1) Calls for an end to the racism of arabs and muslims
2) Believes the Iraqi people have the right to self-determination free from American intervention
3) Calls for IMMEDIATE WITHDRAWAL of all troops from Iraq
4) Calls for the expulsion of private contractors in Iraq and calls for these jobs to be given to the Iraqis
5) Demands that veterans receive the full health benefits, education, and compensation they deserve
6) Demands that compensation be given to the Iraqi people for the invasion, years of sanctions and air strikes, and for years of supporting the dictatorship of Saddam.
7) Is grassroots and does not think that just by electing someone to office that this war is going to end. Afterall, the antiwar movement used to say "half the way with LBJ" to end the war but when he got elected he expanded the war into Cambodia. I think it's important that we do not have disillusions about ANY political candidate, meaning that we realize no matter who gets elected, we are still going to have a war to protest for many years to come.
8) Is opening trying to outreach to other organizations to create a unified left antiwar movement. That means connecting the issues between sexism, islamophobia, the economy, immigrant rights, health care, racism, homophobia, Palestine, Afghanistan, the pending war with Iran, and trying to get people to see how all of these issues are connected to each other through the war.
9) Probably most importantly, recognized the key role veterans play in the antiwar movement. Not as the "token veteran" but as an actual activist and organizer of the movement. Because it won't be possible to end this war unless we get the military on our side.

I'm ready to end this war, and I'm ready for CAN and IVAW to take off the ground and push itself into the national perspective of the antiwar movement. Now who's with me!

CAN Midwest Winter Retreat!

This weekend, Urbana-Champaign was host to not only to the drunken debauchery that is "Unofficial". No, instead our campus was host to the amazing Campus Antiwar Network Midwest Winter Retreat, and it was an incredible success! With members from 6 different chapters across the Midwest, Midwest CAN was able to come together in a way that we have not done before, starting the important work on the regional conference in April and also developing what we hope will be an incredibly successful communication structure, so the gains and networking developed over the weekend aren't lost.

First, the retreat really did a great job of allowing the Midwest to network much better. We have decided to set up a system to ensure members are able to not only contact other branches with ease, but that branches stay in touch regularly through monthly conference calls. Such a system should ensure a much stronger unity among the Midwest, which can only be to the benefit of the movement and to the individual chapters.

Along that line, simply being able to discuss politics and local events with other chapters is eye opening. It was discovered by many of the chapters - Iowa, UIC, and Cincinnati, to name a few - that while they have a very solid logistical aspect of their group, they very rarely talk politics. Most of the members from those groups are likely going to return and encourage a real change in their organizations to allow for more political discussions. For our own part, UIUC suffers from the inverse problem. Our level of political discourse is very high, but because of that we have not focused on events and actions. This may have led to a decreased presence on Campus, which can only depress turnouts. With the weather warming up, however, it is very likely that UIUC will once again become more active in the eyes of the student body at large, as we stage more demonstrations and events.

Additionally, the retreat began to get the Sisyphusian boulder which is the Regional Conference rolling. We set a date (April 18-20), confirmed Iowa as the location, and developed both an overarching vision for the conference as well as a number of concrete suggestions of how to invite other groups into the Conference, whom to work with in particular, and what workshops to put on. Most importantly, we developed the system to get the Conference Planning Committee (the CPC) off the ground by next Sunday - in the first official Regional Conference Call.

That is going to be a very interesting and intense call. It is both the first call for the new Chapter Liaisons and the first call for the CPC, and it is also an open call, so anyone can participate (but only the CPC members can vote on issues relating to the Conference). The CPC will have their hands full, reading abstracts of suggestions for the conference and then debating on them, while the Liaisons, in my mind, will also be quite busy formalizing and finalizing what exactly they hope to accomplish.

Our own chapter will need to elect the Liaison and the CPC members (up to two of the latter, only one of the former) on Tuesday. Tuesday will likely be a busy logistical meeting, but it seems that with the high level of political discourse in our chapter anyway, it is OK to have the logistical meetings, especially with events coming up as they are.

We hope to jump on the Green Party's 5th Anniversary protest the week before Spring Break, and really take the lead in organizing it (since so far it does not seem that the Greens have been as aggressive as they could have been with their outreach to other groups - a charge that frankly could be level at us more often than we would like to admit). We also hope to show the film Winter Soldier with the local IVAW chapter the Monday of that Week of Action, and then show parts of Winter Soldier: Iraq and Afghanistan on either Friday or Saturday. The fact that that is the start of Spring Break could suppress turn out, but even so simply getting the information out to people to allow them to watch it on their own is important.

We can safely say that coming out of the Retreat we all feel much more energized and strengthened as a chapter, and as a movement as a whole. What we need to do now is translate that energy, that networking, and these wonderful ideas into actions and and events to strengthen the chapter. As was stated during the retreat by Madison's own Chris Dols, "The Midwest is only as strong as the sum of its chapters." And we feel that the chapters - all the Midwest chapters - have the potential to be much stronger now than ever before.