Stephen;

My comments are not meant to evoke anger but to better understand what you have stated. Please take them in that context if you will. Perhaps I did not understand your post and you may not understand mine. Forgive me for picking apart various pieces of this communication. It was done only to attempt to clarify those points commented upon.

As is so often the cased with the Internet attempting to communicate with someone whom you do not know is difficult. If we were sitting down person to person I am sure we would have an enjoyable discussion. On the Internet I do not think this is possible.




>I think demostrations are more for the media now.

Some demonstrators in the San Francisco Bay Area will have a tv crew with them. They need each other.

Remember ACT/UP?

No I do not.



A few people (and I mean a few - like 2 or 3) would do something that would bring out the media. An example: Throwing the "blood and body of christ" on the floor after being offered it by the Cardinal himself.

People like to justify his/her actions without concern for others. The important thing is to get your point across and communicate. An act of belligerence and disrespect does not automatically endear one to others. Was the Cardinal and the congregation positively impressed? If so in what way? If not why? What was gained?



That happened at St. Patricks. It was a Zap and it worked like a charm.

How is that? It worked like a charm? What is the subject and result?


ACTUP zapped the stock exchange, CBS News, and the President - all very effective.

How were these "acts" effective? Did they change the world forever?


Now, I hear of other groups trying to recreate ACTUP's success. But, that success was due to having people who believed in their cause at the right places. Like a cameraman at CBS News who let everybody in, or me for eample – (I worked for an investment bank for a time). Also people are harder to impress now. We've gotten too jaded. Chaining yourself to the White House isn't so shocking anymore.
>
>Most of us ex-ACTUPer's are alive, well and back to work. So we don't have the time anymore. Plus the issue has passed.

What in fact was the issue? A singular cause? Or was this a vision to save the world?


Except for some environmental concerns I actually think globalization is a good thing. (ducking...) Okay, I've become part of the "system". :)

I believe many aspects of globalization to be positive for mankind. If we fail to recgonize the existance of the rest of the world and focus on ourselves we will have made a huge mistake. I have taken time from my life to help others in many parts of the world as well as around me. You mean there are poor people in California? You should see the inner cities as well as areas like Central California. We have a need to assist ourselves as well as others. Our son and daughter began assisting others in our community when they were in grammar school and still do as young adults.

Demonstrating is one thing but positive actions have a greater effect on the real world. I cannot change the world with my thoughts. Perhaps others should follow those persons that used airliners to express their opinions on 9/11. I am sure we could find people to agree with that concept.


What is achieved by negative acts that is acts against people, institutions or religious beliefs? Perhaps some will find joy in such acts but I do not. I think it is a matter of respect to not defile others or his/her beliefs. But then we are all different.

Tom