>And your comment about hoping that the Teamsters beat up my friends is
>truly despicable. Blaming protesters for Bush getting elected is about
>as ignorant as blaming Nader for Bush getting elected.
>Thanks for confirming for me why radicals can't work with liberals on
>the streets. If you don't beat us up, you are out there urging the cops
>to beat us up!
Hey Chuck, it had a smiley partly because it was a bit tongue-in-cheek. But the point is that I said IF your actions are designed to mess with other activists goals, you shouldn't be surprised if you get a hostile reaction. You announce a "secret" plan, uncoordinated with other activists, and then you expect total acceptance of such tactics imposed in the middle of other mass actions.
Anarchists by your definition are inherently anti-democratic. They are undemocratic internally, since they depend on secret actions and planning. And they are undemocratic externally, since they refuse to accept any responsibilities to other activists. Your kind of anarchism is all about individualism of the worst sort; it's all about doing what you want, when you want it, and screw anyone who objects.
If you won't submit anything you do to a vote of fellow activists, then you shouldn't be surprised that the "liberals" try to stop you when your actions undermine theirs.
Nathan