With 5000 or even 6000 demonstrators the anti-war demonstration held in Brussels on November 11, 2002 was a major success. Many reports about the demonstration can be found on-line at http://belgium.indymedia.be This gives the opportunity to focus on an incident that isn't so small as it seems. First of all the incident covered here happened not between demonstrators and police, as we might have thought, but beween peaceful participants - who even had subscribed the Charter of the demonstration - and members of the security belonging to the demonstration. On one banner the slogan "Dead to Bush and Saddam - Islam is our path" was written in French. KM, a well known militant of the PVDA, a formerly more Maoist oriented party that has broadened her views and even seems open to working with Muslims nowadays, acting as security now, grabbed the sticks of the banner trying to remove it from the nearly starting demonstration. When questioned about this anti-democratic behavior his reply was that "there is an error in the slogan. "Saddam" should have been "Sharon". This argument was supposed to be enough to continue his attempt to remove, with some pulling and pushing, the demonstrators from their spot, in which he due to pacifist attitude succeeded. Few minutes later a whole gang of security people threw themselves on two timid youngsters carrying the same banner. With no argument at all they tried to confiscate the banner. When an other demonstrator started arguing a "peacekeeper" replied such slogan wasn't allowed. KM, present again, argued this time "this isn't an official slogan of the demonstration". Mmm, a member of a so called 'revolutionary party' sticking to only "Official Slogans". Clean revolution.... An other argument comrade K. came up with was like 'One can not oppose Saddam and be present on this demonstration'. Ha.... What a nonsense argument was that? One can argue threatening foreign heads of states is unlawful and thus to some extend dangerous to the whole demonstration but arguing fiercely one can't participate with the slogan "Dead to Bush and Saddam - Islam is our path" because one is advocating for something better as a his dictatorship .... Might it have been the nowadays triggering word "Islam" that caused the visceral reactions? We can't know but still all arguments used posed very few weight to forbid someone from demonstrating. Indeed, one of the security-gang threatened his fellow demonstrators that if the banner wasn't handed over immediately, their whole gang would be assembled and one would throw the demonstrators out of the march(!). Later we met someone who said he spent all his 'young' savings in buying the material to make the banner and now he didn't know what had happened to it. He felt much more bad and sad as angry about the behavior of the security men. He said the slogan "Dead to Bush and Saddam - Islam is our path" was indeed intended exactly that. No, "Saddam" was not in error there. Everyone, even comrade KM, admits Saddam is a dictator. Then, why not call him so and advocate, hope, for his removal ? Because he's the president of the communist Bath-party? That stinks to dead corpses, fallen in an unfinished revolution. In fact the banner didn't even call Saddam what he is: a cruel dictator. The slogan called for his dead. Everyone knows both Bush and Saddam (yes and indeed Sharon also) have blood on their hands. The world would be a better place without them. Still later we talked with a militant of the same party as KM, the PVDA. She argued that it wasn't the right moment to portray the indeed cruel dictator Saddam as such right now because he was 'the only one facing US-imperialism'. "Later", Saddam could be replaced with someone more democratic", she continued. - Better sooner as later, we think! - Reasons of propaganda should never cover up a dictatorship or the acts of a regime. Not Millosovitch then and neither Saddam, Putin and for this account the feudal clan in Saudi Arabia now. What an unhealthy tactic is it to support bloody dictatorships because they have an argument with godfather USA? What better, alternative world is going to grow on that poisoned soil? The argument that it's "for now" forbidden to call a dictator a dictator is a quite odd argument. Doesn't that sound so to you? What's "bad" can may be be argued about on occasion as we can approach a situation from different angles and out of different cultures and interests but Saddam, Millosovitch, the Saudi's, Bush, Putin and such breed will find support only with those who like to turn away their heads for a cruel reality, hoping for good and refuge from their devils. On the contrary to what some argue Saddam doesn't have much support left in the Islamic world, even not amongst Sunni Muslims, because he clearly seems to use Islam for his own power surge, while acting despotic and as such portraying the world's largest religion in a bad light. Yes, some cultural aspects might give some advantage, as do historical circumstances nowadays, to "great" leaders, to exploit the boundaries of tolerance of the Muslim community but that secular approach can not lure many from seeing through the haze to see Saddam as what he really is: a cruel dictator . We told the communist militant that Muslims judge someone by what he's doing and not by his/her position. The prophet Mohammed (saw) said "The best form of struggle is to confront a tyrannic ruler with the truth". (Ibn Majah, Hadith #4011). Few will found the power to tell Saddam that in his face because of 'practical reasons'. To be challenged by those who seek our cooperation is a struggle on its own. "Dead to Bush and Saddam - Islam is our path". That's a clear message! That the slogan "Dead to Bush and Saddam - Islam is our path" not being an official slogan of the demonstration, is a fake argument to silence those Muslim demonstrators. This demonstration was announced as being against the pending US-war against Iraq and for a just peace in Palestine. God forbid the unionist Roberto D'orazio, the Chileans, the Argentines and the Colombians asking attention for their cause from being thrown out of the demonstration just because their slogans weren't the official ones. What a boring demonstration that would have been. * "This isn't an official slogan of the demonstration" * "There is an error in the slogan. "Saddam" should have been "Sharon" * 'One can not oppose Saddam and be present on this demonstration' Hopefully next time the security of the demonstration can give better reasons for their wishes before starting to argue while already pushing their partners in arms out of the 'joint' demonstration. P.I. Hublou Attachments: A-imperialMarchBrussels11ok02 015.jpg = the confiscated, at least, removed banner A-imperialMarchBrussels11ok02 012.jpg = Chilean flag A-imperialMarchBrussels11ok02 069.jpg = Politial prisoner (?) in the Philippines (?) A-imperialMarchBrussels11ok02 040.jpg = Asking for support for the Argentine people Over 70 more pictures of the demonstration via: http://photos.groups.yahoo.com/group/PIN-forum/lst http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PIN-forum/message/233 See the wiphala-flag at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PIN-forum/ The Wiphala Flag, a symbol of resistance and unified struggle of the indigenous people of south America, symbolizes the rich diversity and equality amongst people. The flag is square and has a colored pater of equal squares. The central diagonal is white. http://www.chaski.yucom.be