> However, I'd estimate that Doug is about right about
> what would happen with an attempt to have stopped its
> operations for real. In fact, people doing that would
> risk being charged under the new anti-terrorism laws,
> not available then, that make it domestic terrorism to
> engage in otherwise illegal activity that poses a
> threat to persons or property with the intention of
> influencing government policy. Naturally if you
> brought out tens of thousands of people that would
> change the political equation, but I don't see anyone
> bringing out tens of thousands for lawful demos or
> nonviolent civil disobedience. Or did I miss
> something?
How pathetic. You really believe this?
How is this any different than the climate for protests in 1997? 1987? 1967?
If you adopt this point of view and don't fight, even using the limited tactic of mass CD, than you are a slave.
Uh, yeah, you would need to bring out thousands of people. A few dozen symbolic protesters would be a waste of time. You don't shut down an army plant with a few nuns and peaceniks. You have to mobilize tens of thousands and bust the jails.
Chuck