I've drawn her attention to this thread, so she'll most likely read it at some point, but she's out of town at the moment (in Edmonton tonight for her book tour if anyone is interested!) so she probably hasn't had a chance to read yet.  She has an account here but she hardly ever uses it.  Probably because she has a calendar/schedule that would daunt 3 people.  I don't know how she does it, frankly. :)  I just posted it here because I wanted to see what babblers would have to say about it, and I knew I'd hear another perspective here - and I think that's really important and great. If you want to draw her attention to something and make sure she sees it, the best place to do that is a comment on her blog.

I'm not wedded to either position in the absolute, nor am I dogmatic about non-violence.  I lean towards Judy's point of view on it, but I do see where "violent" protest is acceptable.  For instance, that eviction of the Harris Tory politician's constituency office (forget his name) is an action I support, even though I realize it probably scared his office staff.  Well, that's what an eviction is like.  Scary.  I totally support OCAP's action in that matter.  Not sure whether Judy would agree with me or not on that one.  I also think that the action in London, attacking that banker's house after he made off with all that money, is laudable.  Violent?  Yes, I suppose, but it was strategic and got the point across, and furthermore, it got good press, which is a bonus.

So I'm not a total pacifist.  I think there's a time and a place.