Which brings us to Gen. Wesley Clark, commander of NATO during the bombing of Serbia. Except in the sense that all wars are civil, Clark did not fight in a civil war. Instead, he led an invading force of imperialist invaders in the cynical dismemberment of a sovereign nation so that the avaricious plutocrats who hold NATO's leash could feast on the corpse of its economy. Like both Goering and Harris before him, when Clark's military campaign stagnated he turned in his impotent rage to slaughtering civilians. Warriors kill other warriors. Cowards kill women and children. This despicable coward shames every American. Think Herman Goering, but this time with smarter bombs and bigger allies. That's Wesley Clark, terrorist, coward, and war criminal.

On Tuesday, Oct. 17, Clark will be speaking in, of all places, Berkeley. At 6 p.m., he will be at the Berkeley Community Theater. I can imagine few places outside of the Balkans where he is less welcome. His appearance will undoubtedly be met with vigorous protest. Terrorist war criminals are not to be tolerated in our midst, or else we share in the guilt. Make no mistake about it, this man is every bit as much a terrorist as is Osama Bin Laden. If anything, he's worse. His body count is certainly higher.

The temptation will surely arise among some to give him a taste of his own medicine, to meet terror with terror. This would be a public relations disaster for all who wish to see justice prevail. If, while on its way to the Community Theater, Clark's car succumbed to an Irish-style culvert bomb or a Georgian-style rocket-propelled grenade attack, the media would paint Clark as a fallen hero and his killers as brutal terrorists. No matter how richly he deserves to be blown to goo, preferably by one of his own bombs, it would be supremely counter-productive to make of this fiend a martyr. I recommend strongly against it.

Certain individuals, who shall remain nameless, told me that some demonstrators will be bringing hangmen's nooses to the anti-Clark demo. They encouraged others to do the same. While I must admit that waving them around would make for some superior street theater, actually lynching the guy is a bad idea because justice would not be served. Hanging is too good for a guy like Clark. I'd rather see him spend his life at hard labor, undoing by hand the damage his war crimes have wrought.

I recommend strongly against terrorism in general. My objection is not based on any moral objections. Far from it. Terrorism is, if anything, the least inhumane form of warfare possible, if only because it affects the least number of people. I eschew terrorism because warfare, even the least inhumane warfare possible, simply cannot create the world I want to live in. It will take simultaneous mass grassroots organizing on a planet wide scale to even come close to what I, and those like me, seek to achieve. There are no shortcuts, violent or otherwise.

Organizing on such a scale used to not be technologically possible. In the '60s, there was a planetwide mass uprising of youth. The whole world was engulfed. But we couldn't communicate with each other. We couldn't coordinate our actions. This is no longer true. The Internet has made instantaneous worldwide communication so cheap and easy that it is no longer the sole purview of the privileged few and the corporate-government complex. This quantum leap in technology has borne heady political fruit. 2000 was, as the current saying goes, "The year everything changed." If the anti-IMF/WB/WTO/NAFTA/GATT forces keep up this momentum and if current trends continue, the NWO will soon have to quit slathering its fangs and start licking its wounds.

If this comes to pass, it will be mainly the work of anarchists. Both the left and the right, each in its own way, talk a good anti-NWO game, at least when they're not blaming each other for its very existence. But it is the anarchists who take to the streets and stalk this monster in its very lair.

Demonstrations against the de facto world government held in Prague on Sept. 26 ("S26") were accorded barely 15 seconds on America's corporate TV news. What was suppressed outright was that scores of simultaneous coordinated demonstrations were held in solidarity with the action in Prague on every continent except Antarctica. The Internet made this possible. If we'd had the Internet in the '60s, you would be living in a much different world today.

"Reclaim the Streets" in Berkeley

One such solidarity demo was held in Berkeley. It was called "Reclaim the Streets." I was there. That's where I heard about Gen. Clark's impending arrival. The demo was, in many ways, a typical Berkeley demo, loud but indecisive. There were, however, a couple of interesting tactical innovations on the part of the demonstrators. People met up at the downtown BART station. As the march began, it headed straight for City Hall and the new jail. Both were conspicuously defended. At the last possible minute marchers swung north. Then a certain individual, who will remain nameless, began passing out torches. Yes, torches. It's been quite a while since the last time a mob carrying torches headed up Berkeley's main drag. Yet that's exactly what happened when the marchers rounded the next corner. It didn't accomplish a whole hell of a lot but it sure was a glorious sight. Predictably, it was not shown even on local news, let alone on the corporate networks.

They weren't the greatest possible torches. They were two foot-long pieces of 1 inch-by-1 inch scrap lumber, with one end wrapped in paraffin-soaked rags. The paraffin melted faster than it burned, so it ran down the sticks and got on people's hands. It didn't burn very long, either. Within a few blocks the torches had all guttered out.

Three foot-long 1.75-inch oak dowels with rags soaked in pitch would have been much more impressive, and would have lasted longer, too. And even when they’d burned out, they’d have made dandy weapons. But I guess nobody thought of that.

Or maybe they did.

And the guy who passed out the torches probably would have been wiser to mask up beforehand, too. But, hey, it’s not my place to criticize. I didn’t even bring any torches. All I brought was my press card and my notebook. That’s all I ever bring to these things. I’m not a rioter. Nor do I incite riots. I’m a journalist. I come only to observe. Besides, I’m too old to riot. It’d probably give me a heart attack or something.

The key intersection of Shattuck and Center was soon occupied. A 20-foot tall English Anti-Roads Campaign-style tripod was erected. A protester climbed to the top. These tripods are very effective demo props, even better than the now famous giant puppets. During the Battle of Seattle, one guy with a tripod single-handedly blockaded one intersection for hours. I couldn't help but wonder why the demonstrators in Berkeley deployed only one tripod. Simultaneous deployment of multiple tripods at key intersections around the city would have forced the police to scatter their forces. But I guess nobody thought of that, either.

Even so, people were able to take over this key intersection and hold an enthusiastic techno/hip-hop dance party right in the middle of it. This is called "creating a Temporary Autonomous Zone" ("TAZ" for short). Two portable sound systems, mounted on bicycle trailers, pounded out excellent beats. Soon the cheery glow of a bonfire had most people dancing around a pile of smashed-up newspaper vending boxes. Most newspapers make a better source of kindling than they do of information. After a good long while the cops moved in and drove people back with threatening gestures. They were firm but restrained. No doubt they had heard about the Czech policemen who had been set on fire by molotov cocktails earlier in the day and didn't want to provoke a similar fate for themselves. The protesters withdrew to the opposite side of the intersection and regrouped. They immediately built a second bonfire, even as a fire truck was moved in to foam the first bonfire out. Then the cops got a little pushier and captured the second bonfire.

Neither side really wanted to fight, so the crowd began to retreat, slowly at first, but always in good order. They immediately moved on through a second key intersection, University Avenue and Shattuck, kindling a series of small, symbolic fires in the street as they went, all the while chanting, "Whose streets? Our streets. Whose streets? Our streets," again and again. For the moment, at least, they were.

After nearly 40 years of ongoing confrontations, the cops and the demonstrators of Berkeley have developed a healthy respect for each other. A certain degree of detente has developed, and with it certain unspoken rules of engagement. Another theory holds that the city government is intimidated by demonstrators and keeps their cops on a very short leash. Whatever the reason, street demos in Berkeley often resemble battles between condottieri. There is a great deal of noise and posturing on both sides, but few on either side get seriously hurt.

This is not to say that cops have never committed vicious brutalities in Berkeley. They have. But for the most part, this has been the work of outside forces, county cops, state cops, and even the National Guard. Berkeley actually has two police forces, the University of California police and the municipal police. City Hall controls the municipal police. The university controls the UC cops. The UC cops work on and near campus. The UC cops are most decidedly not on a short leash. They are vicious, brutal, and dangerous. Wisely, they were not engaged on S26.

Two blocks north of Center Street, Shattuck Avenue intersects University Avenue, Berkeley's main drag. Shattuck and University is the largest intersection in Berkeley and is considered the heart of the city. The crowd turned west on University, in part because to turn east would have taken it very quickly into UC cop turf. Experience has taught that it is most unwise to unnecessarily engage a second force while being pursued, even halfheartedly, by the first.

It was at Shattuck and University that one guy tried to burn down a McDonald's. This was a stupid thing to do because there were workers inside. Also, the street outside was well lit and the cops were video taping everything. The rest of the crowd kept its distance from this guy and kept on moving.

When the demonstrators passed the Citibank branch at 2323 Shattuck Ave., two of them were seen breaking windows. In part, Citibank was targeted because it's a symbol of global capitalism. In part it was attacked because the windows were made of glass and not of Lexan. Most bank windows in Berkeley, especially the ones at ground level, are made of Lexan. Bankers may be cold-blooded, evil, and ugly, but stupid they usually are not. Citibank bankers must be an exception. Glass bank windows in Berkeley? I sure wouldn't trust my money to the care of people that dumb.

The bank windows were broken with metal street barricades of the kind used to keep cars from driving into holes in the street and crushing the workers inside. Personally, I believe that Berkeley's powers that be leave these things, as well as all those newspaper vending boxes and trash cans, lying around during demos to give demonstrators something on which to vent their anger. They may even have arranged for a token, breakable bank window to be where it could be reached. It's a whole lot cheaper to let people blow off steam doing minor damage than it is to let their anger build up to the point that they try to burn City Hall and lynch the mayor.

It remains to be seen what sort of action will develop when Clark shows up in town. Perhaps demonstrators will adopt the interesting new tactical technologies that the Italian group Ya Basta used in Prague. Or maybe they'll stick to the tried-and-true. Time will tell. I'll keep you posted. I do intend to be there. But while I'm there, I intend to break no laws. Nor do I advocate that anybody else break any laws. Specifically, I do not advocate rioting. I want to make that perfectly clear, right here in public. If people riot anyway, it's not my fault.

But kids today, what can you do?

Well, I'm out of space again, that's all for this time. Next time we'll examine one of terrorism's less obvious but equally important dichotomies, that between attacks against people and attacks against property. We'll also take a look at certain technological innovations that enable a third option, attacks against information. Specifically, we'll look at HERF guns, TEDs and the mysterious Z-Ray. It'll be fun. So stay tuned.