I'm a clerical/low-level development worker in the social services sector. My employer was not in any way involved with the day's activities, and is not involved in antiwar causes more generally. I had to take the day off to attend.

I think it's impossible to be completely objective, and downright absurd to suggest that one person -- necessarily only witnessing part of what happened during the day, and predisposed to see things in a way shaped by their own previous experiences -- could present anything approaching a complete and objective picture of what occurred. *That's* the sense in which I'm biased.

As for the matter of there being a "movement as a whole": there are various groups and individuals who want to see the war end, and who have an interest in seeing it end. You can call that a movement or not; I don't see how it really matters.

The important point is that this goal can't be achieved unless you have a movement in the full sense of the word -- a movement that moves. And in many cases, the antiwar groups themselves are responsible for preventing such a thing from emerging.

Sam, I want to apologize. I had guessed, wrongly, that you were an entirely different Sam, one who was closely connected with groups organizing and promoting the event. Thank you for your story and account of what happened.

S'okay.

That's why your movement never gets moving. There is so much dissention amongst the ranks. this shit is pitiful!