Hi Arthur,
Thanks for responding. I'm glad we can have an open dialogue about this, albeit electronically and rather anonymously, but nonetheless important.

I have to say, however, that I disagree with the assertion that public officials (whether we agree with them or not) are somehow entitled to a certain degree of privacy in their personal/private lives. I say this, not because they are public officials, because I believe the problems in the world are clearly not due to just public officials, but because I don't think that murderers, torturers, rapists, etc, deserve the least bit of respite. Has Negroponte, just as an example, physically killed anyone himself personally? I don't know, but I know that he has ordered killings, and helped equip known killers with resources, knowing what their actions will be. To me, he might as well have pulled the trigger, or burned the village, as the case might be. What do you think? Do you think that the responsibility for government sanctioned 'crimes' falls on those carrying out the act, those who order the act, or some of both? I believe that the perpetrators of such injustice should be subject to the wills of the people and communities that they have wronged. But, I'm digressing, back to the issue of privacy. Negroponte, and many others, have ruined countless lives through their actions and policies, both directly and indirectly. They have taken away any "right to privacy" that existed from literally thousands of people, to speak only of Negroponte. To put it bluntly, it's very hard to have a sense of privacy when CIA trained death squads are killing, disappearing and torturing your friends and family. Now, I know, as you said, that you're not comparing the heinous wrongs of these murderers, to what you feel is an ineffective tactic, but a just cause, but I'm just trying to explain where I'm coming from.

Regarding media coverage, we agree on some things. The corporate media does not, and will not cover significantly home demonstrations. There has been a significant amount of independent media coverage, which I think is great. Can you think of ways that independent media coverage could be expanded, with the goal of educating more people? If the goal of our actions was to generate corporate media coverage, you're right, we didn't do that well. This isn't to say that the media can't ever be used to one's advantage, but only that taking an action should be done for the purpose of exposing injustice, whether or not corporate media will cover it.

I think your suggestion for doing social research is a good one. In fact, some of this is already going on. In the case of Negroponte, at least two neighbors were supportive of protestors right to protest despite police harassment. That's not to say that everyone will be supportive, but just an anectdotal example.

I think you're also right that outreach and education are key to trying to stop and expose injustice and oppression, whatever form they might take. I would encourage you to come to a DAWN meeting (every Tuesday at 7 PM; 2211 14th Street NW). New ideas and opinions are always welcome. Maybe your input about outreach could be very helpful!

I know you suggested social research as one method of raising awareness. I absolutely agree that constantly reevaluating tactics and strategies are key to the effectiveness of, well, anything really. Are there other activities that you feel would be helpful to raise awareness? Would you want to take part in any of them? I'm always open to trying new things and not tied down to any particular tactic. This just happens to be a tactic that we think is effective. Does that mean we're necessarily right? No. But, it's what we see as effective, and one can only act based on what one believes to be right (based on feedback and personal opinions), right?

Regarding your last point; do you think that tactics "making" people sympathetic to people doing terrible things (if that is indeed the case, and I'm not certain about that) speaks about those carrying out the tactic, or those becoming sympathetic to murderers?

I think not acting on one's convictions is inexcusable.