home

A Day of Protest

By TChris, Section War In Iraq
Posted on Sat Sep 24, 2005 at 05:34:31 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Bump and Update: (TL):

100,000 joined the protest.

***********
Original Post by TChris

In Europe:

A London demonstration against the war in Iraq drew at least 10,000 people today as similar protests were planned in European capitals including Paris, Rome, Madrid and Oslo ....

In the United States:

Opponents of the war in Iraq rallied by the thousands Saturday to demand the return of U.S. troops, staging a day of protest, song and remembrance of the dead in marches through Washington and other American and European cities.

A mother from the UK marches with Cindy Sheehan. The public sides with the anti-war protestors:

A CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll released this week said 63 percent of Americans support the immediate withdrawal of "some or all" of the U.S. troops in Iraq.

< Abu Ghraib's Charles Graner Causing Trouble in Prison | Violent Crime at a 32 Year Low >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    A Day of Protest | 126 comments (126 topical)
    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#1)
    by Ernesto Del Mundo on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:16 PM EST
    The two most effective ways to stop the war are: 1. 100 percent publically financed campaigns 2. draft upper class kids to fight it

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#2)
    by cpinva on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:16 PM EST
    my gut reaction is, yes, bring them home now, this very instant. do not pass go, do not collect $200. then, it occurs to me that our president and, by extension, us, have put the iraqi people in a somewhat precarious position. by destroying the governmental infrastructure, we've left them open to the depradations of the bad guys. if we declare "victory" and leave, without having positioned them to defend themselves, it will be cambodia, under the khmer rouge, all over again, the infamous "killing fields". do you want that on your conscionse? i don't, and neither, i suspect, do a lot of otherwise well intentioned americans. you can claim that you had nothing to do with the war, you opposed it from the start. so did i, and many others. unfortunately, thanks to mr. bush and his gang, we are now collectively responsible for the safety and well being of the iraqi people, whether we want to be or not. it would be immoral to abandon them at this point. punish the republicans in the next elections, but don't punish the iraqi people, they are the innocent parties here.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#3)
    by Lww on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:16 PM EST
    I was thinking about going down to my old stomping grounds and take part in the demonstration in DC but I realized it would be overtaken by the screaming fringe race-baiting/anti-everything types. Thank God I abstained. C-Span aired speeches by the usual dopes talking about everything BUT the war. These people are doing more harm than good.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#4)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:16 PM EST
    Based on the CSpan coverage, there were maybe 2000 people there. The speeches were scattershot, a smorgasbord of every left end grievance out there. If this is what you folks call a success, I'd love to see your definition of failure. Just as a point of comparison - there were at least an order of magnitude more people at the Girl Scout Jamboree I chaperoned 2 summers ago. Which tells you something about the "power" of the anti-war movement. Up thread in the comments, I see yet another person calling for the draft. Funny how only the left wants one.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#5)
    by Molly Bloom on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:16 PM EST
    Washington Post, NY TImes, MSNBC say tens of thousands... that's a little more than 2000. Its funny how the right supports the war as long as somebody else fights it. Notwithstanding the numerous off topic speakers at the rally, here's another number for you: According to a CNN/USA Today poll, over the summer a majority of Americans went from thinking the war was not a mistake to thinking that it was. In the most recent polling, from Sept. 16-18, a record 67 percent disapproved of Bush's handling of Iraq, while 63 percent said some or all US troops should be withdrawn.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#6)
    by Molly Bloom on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:16 PM EST
    Washington Post, NY TImes, MSNBC say tens of thousands... that's a little more than 2000. Its funny how the right supports the war as long as somebody else fights it. Notwithstanding the numerous off topic speakers at the rally, here's another number for you: According to a CNN/USA Today poll, over the summer a majority of Americans went from thinking the war was not a mistake to thinking that it was. In the most recent polling, from Sept. 16-18, a record 67 percent disapproved of Bush's handling of Iraq, while 63 percent said some or all US troops should be withdrawn.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#7)
    by cpinva on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:16 PM EST
    Up thread in the comments, I see yet another person calling for the draft. Funny how only the left wants one.
    gee jim, i figured that you, as a clearly right thinking american, would want everyone to bear some of the risk involved in a voluntary war, not just those foolish, or desperate enough to join the all-volunteer army. if the war was such a good thing for the country, then it seems only fair that everyone should bear part of the burden, not just a few. i can't imagine you could, with a straight face, argue with that logic.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#8)
    by Lww on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:16 PM EST
    The draft would have been a sure deterrent in 2002-2003 in keeping this war from happening. As Cindy Sheehan has stated, this is a war to maintain the status quo in the Middle East. Israel is the main benificiary of this war. A draft now would force us to abandon Iraq (cpinva said it best) and leave them to fend for themselves in a murderous civil war. Go back to the archives in here and look at the tepid response to the impending war, nothing was being said. The Zionists on the left loved this war because it did two things; helped and strenghtened Israel and weakened Bush and his rightist administration at home. A pact with the devil. Forget the dead soldiers....

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#9)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:16 PM EST
    The Zionists on the left? Zionism is a rightist movement, as anyone who isn't a maniac knows. The 'murderous civil war' has been planned from the start, so spare us the croc tears, you liar. The war weakened Bush at home? Wow, and who is to blame for that? As for 'forget the dead soldiers,' no, I and MILLIONS of my fellow Americans will never do that -- we're on the streets today and week after week, making sure that the right-controlled press isn't getting away with making the dead from Bush's war invisible. A draft to make the upper class serve will NEVER be made to work. You might as well demand that the rich not buy fancy cars, Ernesto. As for publically financed campaigns, wow, that would be great, but you have to have a plural democracy to pass laws, and then you have to have to find some way to get the MONSTER to disgorge its control on power. How do you plan on doing that?

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#10)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:16 PM EST
    Paul in LA, Don't you get it yet? Left is a synonym for something that is temporarily thought bad or stupid. Here's how it works: Everyone knows conservatives can't be wrong. Therefore is someone has bad ideas, they must be on the Left. Therefore, if Zionists support Bush, they're allies of American conservatives. When they don't, they're leftwing nuts. QED.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#11)
    by Lww on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:16 PM EST
    Zionism transcends all political beliefs so give a hoot and read a book. I was going to respond to you more but it's hopeless. Keep marching.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#12)
    by desertswine on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:17 PM EST
    CNN:
    Police Chief Charles H. Ramsey, noting that organizers had hoped to draw 100,000 people, said, "I think they probably hit that."
    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#13)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:17 PM EST
    cpinva - you make good sense here...
    ..thanks to mr. bush and his gang, we are now collectively responsible for the safety and well being of the iraqi people, whether we want to be or not. it would be immoral to abandon them at this point.
    Also immoral not to do everything possible to hold bush and cronies accountable.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#14)
    by Sailor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:17 PM EST
    Go back to the archives in here and look at the tepid response to the impending war, nothing was being said.
    That's a lie, and I proved it a lie before with links to comments from that time. Please, please ask for links!
    I realized it would be overtaken by the screaming fringe race-baiting/anti-everything types.
    Riiiight, 100,000 folks are all fringe, just like 60% of americans. ... Next! cpinva -
    then, it occurs to me that our president and, by extension, us, have put the iraqi people in a somewhat precarious position. by destroying the governmental infrastructure, we've left them open to the depradations of the bad guys.
    I understand your point, but I submit that we are the destabalizing force there. We should ask for help from the UN and Arab nations and get the hell out!

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#15)
    by Sailor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:17 PM EST
    In Washington, a few hundred people in a counter demonstration in support of Bush's Iraq policy
    D.C. police and U.S. Park Police said there were no significant problems during the demonstrations and reported three arrests
    Wow, 100,000 + and 3 were arrested. Yep, sounds like a fringe to me. [/not] The wrongwingers haven't been right yet, why is our country being held hostage to them!?

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#16)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:17 PM EST
    AP Story: "More than 2,000 people gathered on the Ellipse hours before the showcase demonstration past the White House, the first wave of what organizers said would be the largest Washington rally since the war began. President Bush himself was out of town, monitoring hurricane recovery efforts from Colorado and Texas." last time I looked, "more than 2000" wasn't at all like "100,000". I watched the CSpan coverage, and if that was 100,000 people, I'm the queen of Romania (with apologies to Dorothy Parker)

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#17)
    by Sailor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:17 PM EST
    "the president made sure to absent himself from the White House while the march was scheduled. He canceled a trip to Texas because it was too sunny and instead hid in a bunker in Colorado."
    D.C. Police Chief Charles Ramsey said the group probably had reached its goal of 100,000.
     Congratualtions your highness.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#18)
    by Kitt on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:17 PM EST
    I watched the CSpan coverage, and if that was 100,000 people, I'm the queen of Romania (with apologies to Dorothy Parker)
    Well, yer Majesty - I watched CSPAN as well and at one point saw a long shot view of people in the streets and there were considerably more than 2,000. Around the speaker stands or the main speaker stand CSPAN was focused upon most of the time, there didn't seem to be that many right there. And here you are arguing about whether there was only 2,000 or 100,000. From Reuters
    "The crowds in Washington swelled through the day, and by late afternoon organizers of the anti-war demonstration said 300,000 people had assembled -- exceeding an anticipated 100,000. Washington police declined to comment on the size of the rally.
    The people count doesn't really matter. The point is they were there. That pseudomandate Bush swore he had, it's expired.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#19)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:17 PM EST
    So Kitt - if we are to take the advocate's word for how big the crowd was, we should also believe funded research from corporations, right? There's no reason that either source would have a reason to mislead us, is there?

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#20)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:17 PM EST
    Edger said, "...Also immoral not to do everything possible to hold bush and cronies accountable." I agree in theory but as a practical matter this will not happen. I know everyone here wants Bush and the boys to go to prison, but if we are real with ourselves, we know its not going to happen. He will retire and be loved by the right and hated by the left. No matter what he does and what the left says, he will be the right's hero. Not because he deserves the title, but because he is their boy and can do no wrong. I hate it too but he will not be held accountable. At least not in any tangible way. Cpinva is right, um, I mean correct, let's let the Republicans know what we think of them at the next election.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#21)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:17 PM EST
    our president and, by extension, us, have put the iraqi people in a somewhat precarious position. by destroying the governmental infrastructure, we've left them open to the depradations of the bad guys. if we declare "victory" and leave, without having positioned them to defend themselves, it will be cambodia, under the khmer rouge, all over again, the infamous "killing fields".
    You make a good point and I don't think that we should pull out immediately because there would be a civil war that would last like 10 years. However I also think that our presence in Iraq is causing much of the instability there. The terrorist groups in Iraq are convincing the Iraqi people that we are never going to leave their country. Bush saying we are going to “stay the course” and Rumsfeld saying our troops could be there for 12 more years certainly isn’t helping. I think that we should set a timetable for when we are going to start phasing out our troops.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#22)
    by Ernesto Del Mundo on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:17 PM EST
    Up thread in the comments, I see yet another person calling for the draft. Funny how only the left wants one.
    Funny how only the right wants a war that they don't have to fight in.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#23)
    by Aaron on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:17 PM EST
    "IMPEACH BUSH AND NOW!" I agree with that. ---------------------------------- I was not impressed with all the anti-Israel propaganda from all the Palestinian groups who spoke at this rally. Describing the state of Israel as an apartheid state comparable to South Africa in the 1980s is more than a distortion of the situation is little more than rhetorical propaganda. Any Palestinian can become an Israeli citizen with full rights under the law and even be elected to the Knesset. Something that I don't believe any Arab country can match. In fact Israel is in danger of losing its Jewish identity because of the birthrate of the indigenous Arab population, which have full Israeli citizenship. I spent some time in the state of Israel, and the Palestinian situation is something that by and large was created by an Islamic fundamentalist leadership that believes there is no place in the world for Jews. The recent pullouts in Gaza were met with a massive celebration where the Palestinian Authority spent more than $1 million on flags alone, and something between 6 and 9 million on the party. Somehow it's hard to see the Palestinians as a poor oppressed people when their leadership can blow millions on a party to celebrate the departure of the Jews. Perhaps that money would've been better spent on education and infrastructure. Additionally all those beautiful homes, which were vacated will be torn down because the Palestinian leadership would never allow Palestinians to live in a place made unclean by a Jewish presence. That's a whole bunch of nice new homes with air-conditioning, modern appliances and good plumbing which will be destroyed, while thousands of Palestinians continue to live in dilapidated housing and squalor so that the Palestinian Authority can demonstrate their solidarity with fundamentalist Islam. Again, I'm not impressed.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#24)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:17 PM EST
    Aaron Brown of CNN mentioned that many people were complaining that the protests in Washington DC received no coverage. He stated that Rita was the big story, and "that was the truth." However, CNN was repeating reports of trivial matters, such as the rescue of dogs and other things. Aaron Brown's statement was clearly false. CNN could have found time to cover the story.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#25)
    by Kitt on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:17 PM EST
    {James, I have no clue what you're talking about.} For anyone who's interested here's some good pics of today's march starting with this one which shows about '2,000 folks' out for a stroll. There's some counter-protesters, one of whom has an American flag draped around his neck which I personally find disrespectful. As well as quite typical of those who think it's fundamentally necessary to have American flags plastered on everything & everyone in order to demonstrate their level of fascist-like Americanism.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#26)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:17 PM EST
    Additionally all those beautiful homes, which were vacated will be torn down because the Palestinian leadership would never allow Palestinians to live in a place made unclean by a Jewish presence.
    That’s not why they are demolishing them. They are doing it because there are too few houses and too many homeless Palestinians. So they are going to tear them down and build lots of smaller homes in order to house more people.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#27)
    by Ernesto Del Mundo on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:17 PM EST
    Additionally all those beautiful homes, which were vacated will be torn down because the Palestinian leadership would never allow Palestinians to live in a place made unclean by a Jewish presence.
    Aaron you're full of it. Mofaz initially had recommended destruction of the homes and greenhouses in the settlements. Israel had wanted to avoid scenes of jubilant Palestinians taking over the settlers' homes. In 1982, Israel was heavily criticized for razing the settlement of Yamit and others when it withdrew from the Sinai desert under terms of a peace treaty with Egypt. Israel under Likud is a rogue state, just like the U.S. is under Bush.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#28)
    by Ernesto Del Mundo on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:17 PM EST
    As for publically financed campaigns, wow, that would be great, but you have to have a plural democracy to pass laws, and then you have to have to find some way to get the MONSTER to disgorge its control on power. How do you plan on doing that?
    By voting for people who refuse to take big money contributions. A little public education will go a long way. No, it won't be easy killing the beast, but the process is already underway, and it will be a rising tide given the looting of the treasury,wars, and general malfeasance that Bush is piling on the country.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#29)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:17 PM EST
    Posted by LWW: "Zionism transcends all political beliefs." That's utter nonsense. Zionism is RACIST, it is FUNDAMENTALIST, and it is DEEPLY CONSERVATIVE in the social sense. It is not particularly different than the Islamic Jihadism you nuts are so obsessed with.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#30)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:17 PM EST
    More lies: 069twiggy: "I don't think that we should pull out immediately because there would be a civil war that would last like 10 years." The policy from the start has been civil war. There is no other way to keep fifteen airbases than to PARTITION the country after a bloody civil war. Since that is the policy from the start, the policy from the start is GENOCIDE. Sending the troops to commit genocide in order to forceably install airbases in a sovereign state is naked aggression, and a violation of the UN charter. Since such an illegal aggression is itself an act of war, the power of the Congress, which was lied to about the threat, has been abridged, which is an impeachable offense. Since the policy is civil war, it is RACISM, and the hatred produced by killing 130,000 Iraqis makes Bush's actions TREASON. He is acting against our national security interests, as his crony capitalism is acting against our economic interests, and our safety with his fake, crony-filled Departimento di Seguridadi Italiani.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#31)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:17 PM EST
    Posted by Ernesto Del Mundo: "By voting for people who refuse to take big money contributions." Well, I hope you have a good barber to keep your appearance up during the Rip Van Winkle episdoe of waiting for enough politicians to do that. It's the usual leftist Catch 22. If you only want the pure, you get next to no representation at all. Politics is the only solution to politics. Fight for your voting rights. Getting the votes of all the people counted is the only path to populist (often cash-poor) campaigns.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#32)
    by Ernesto Del Mundo on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:17 PM EST
    Which came first, the Diebold or the bribe? Clean campaigns and one person/one vote are closely related issues. I think most people are becoming aware of the corrupting influence of campaign financing...and want it stopped. This includes people from all across the political spectrum. The Bushies have become the poster boys and girls for the how badly the current system needs to be cleaned up.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#33)
    by roger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:17 PM EST
    The washington Post calls it at 150,000 to 300,000. The Bushies were very tolerant of the protesters

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#34)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:17 PM EST
    The Washington Post wasn't watching the coverage then. I watched CSpan, start to finish. I saw aerial shots. Bottom line - not even close to that number. Heck, the speakers gave up an hour before CSpan's coverage was set to end - it looked like there were fewer than 100 people standing on the ellipse by then. Bonus link, for those of you who think that protesting supports the troops

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#35)
    by cpinva on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:17 PM EST
    james, if their morale is that tenuous, i submit that the problem lies not with the anti-war protestors, but with your stars. apparently, somewhere along the way, these soldiers have not been taught exactly what it is they are supposed to be defending: the constitution. i seem to recall, though it's been almost 25 years, something about that in the oath i swore at afees/baltimore. at the time, i thought that was a good thing, clearly i was mistaken. what they are actually fighting for, per your link, is the right to have everyone in this country agree, 100%, with no abstentions, with the president's foreign policy. silly me, whatever was i thinking? i think a draft would be a fine idea, let all levels of society share in the fun. it's the right thing to do. if we could convince the other arab countries to unite for the purpose of protecting iraq, while it rebuilds, and allowing us to gracefully exit, that certainly works for me. better yet, a u.n. mandate might work. as it is, as long as we're there, our guys have a big bull's eye planted on their backs. this whole regime is corrupt & inept, starting at the top. come 2006, should the dems retake the majority in congress, watch the paper shredders go into overdrive in every defeated republican's office, and the delete key being worn to a nub. count on it.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#36)
    by roger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:17 PM EST
    Thank you James, I will certainly believe your link to an anonymous comment by a (possible?) veteran before I believe myself (veteran), or my fellow veteran friends. I also believe what you watched on TV over one of the most respected news outlets in the country. Thanks for showing me that everyone is wrong but you

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#37)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:17 PM EST
    PIL writes:
    There is no other way to keep fifteen airbases than to PARTITION the country after a bloody civil war.
    PIL, you keep mouthing off about 15 airbases. How about telling us why we want 15 airbases? James Robertson - Exactly. Roger - A 100% variation in any statement immediately leaves me to believe that the statement is highly inaccuarte and made by someone who wants to distort, wants to leave a number in people's mind, or wants to be sensational. Ernesto - Given that you sometimes appear rational, can you tell us why no bribes have ever been proven? I mean you have George Soros, Ted Kennedy, John Kerry-Heinz and a host of other Demo millionares with resources out the wazooo. And they have lost their power positions. They have been marginalized. Yet we have no proof, no arrests, nothing but claims. Kinda makes me think your charges are pure BS, if you know waht I mean. PIL writes:
    Fight for your voting rights. Getting the votes of all the people counted is the only path to populist (often cash-poor) campaigns.
    Read what I just wrote to Ernie above, appply italics and bold for emphasis and appply it to your continual charges. Tell us, PIL. Would the Demos not be using that if it were true. Time to MoveOn, PIL. PIL writes:
    Since the policy is civil war, it is RACISM, and the hatred produced by killing 130,000 Iraqis makes Bush's actions TREASON.
    PIL, that is pure nonsense. First show us a link that proves that the policy is civil war. You won't because you can't. Then show us a link to a dictionary that proves what you continually write about racism. You can't. Show us a link proving that 130,000 Iraqis have been killed. The best you will be able to do is show us a link that uses some wild assumpations that have been shown wrong numerous times. PIL, you are full of nonsense. You keep saying the same thing, over and over, but you never provide any proof. Let's see some proof, PIL. 069twiggy writes:
    That’s not why they are demolishing them. They are doing it because there are too few houses and too many homeless Palestinians. So they are going to tear them down and build lots of smaller homes in order to house more people.
    That's satire, right? I mean surely you can't believe such nonsense. Mac Lane writes:
    However, CNN was repeating reports of trivial matters, such as the rescue of dogs and other things.
    That is because the vast majority of the US thinks rescuing dogs is more noble than protesting a war in which our troops need 100% support. Ernie writes:
    Israel under Likud is a rogue state, just like the U.S. is under Bush.
    Remember that "sometimes appear rational" I wrote above? I take it back.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#38)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:17 PM EST
    cpinva writes:
    if we could convince the other arab countries to unite for the purpose of protecting iraq
    If a bullfrog had wings, he wouldn't bump his butt. I mean if we could have done that, al-Qaida would have been controlled by these same countries 10 years ago.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#39)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:17 PM EST
    Roger, I watched the coverage on CSpan. No narrative, no announcers, no analysts. Just camera shots of the speakers and the crowd. To cpinva - it's not that the morale of soldiers is "so tenuous" that they will be cast down by protests - the point is, it's not supporting them. Which isn't to say that protesting is some cosmic wrong - just don't be all starry eyed about how it supports the troops - it doesn't. You could read plenty of history about how Union Soldiers felt about the protests that took place in their time, if you need further edification - and an example that's far removed from present day politics.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#40)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:17 PM EST
    He [bush] will retire and be loved by the right and hated by the left. No matter what he does and what the left says, he will be the right's hero. Not because he deserves the title, but because he is their boy and can do no wrong. ... Cpinva is right, um, I mean correct, let's let the Republicans know what we think of them at the next election.
    Let them know what we think (how little we think) of them every day, here, and everywhere else in daily life, hold them accountable, and rub their noses in their piles of sh** everyday... so that they really do find out at the next election. ------ “See, in my line of work you got to keep repeating things over and over and over again for the truth to sink in, to kind of catapult the propaganda.” —George W. Bush, May 24, 2005

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#41)
    by roger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:17 PM EST
    James, ABC news quotes the DC chief of police stating that the proteste probably did attract 100,000 people. Remember, this was a day long event. They may not have had anywhere near 100,000 at one time, but throughout the day, could hit their goal. So, now it's Washington Post, ABC news, and the DC Chief of police Vs. James

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#42)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:17 PM EST
    Demonstration Is Largest in Capital Since U.S. Military Invaded Iraq
    By Petula Dvorak Washington Post Staff Writer Sunday, September 25, 2005; A01 Protest organizers estimated that 300,000 people participated, triple their original target. D.C. Police Chief Charles H. Ramsey, who walked the march route, said the protesters achieved the goal of 100,000 and probably exceeded it. Asked whether at least 150,000 showed up, the chief said, "That's as good a guess as any".
    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#43)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:17 PM EST
    edger quotes:
    Protest organizers estimated that 300,000 people participated, triple their original target. D.C. Police Chief Charles H. Ramsey, who walked the march route, said the protesters achieved the goal of 100,000 and probably exceeded it. Asked whether at least 150,000 showed up, the chief said, "That's as good a guess as any".
    That's like asking a player what his hole cards are and not making him show'em. You believe such nonsense? Sorry, dumb question. You do. Roger - The Chief said 100,000. Big difference between 100,000 and 300,000, don't you think? And remember, Police Chiefs like big numbers. The bigger the number, the better his troops did in taking care of things. James Robertson - It isn't the morale of our troops being hurt that I worry about, It is the morale of the terrorist leaders being improved by the demonstrators encouraging them to believe that if they hold out, the Left will cause the US to withdraw, just as it did in Vietnam. All of this takes time. The more time, the more dead Americans. LInk

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#44)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:17 PM EST
    A lot of Liars for Bush on this comment section. There were between 20k (the police) and 50k (organizers) in San Francisco a much smaller demonstration than the one in DC

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#45)
    by Mike on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:17 PM EST
    I was at the rally. Here's my take: http://greyhairsblog.blogspot.com/2005/09/pissed.html The media is no surprise in it's lack of coverage. But "some" bloggers sure smell like the cocktail crowd....

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#46)
    by roger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:17 PM EST
    Jim, I would never take the organizers' numbers for any political event, but the DC police do a lot of this. The NRO usually comes out a few weeks after an event with a good count of the PEAK size of DC rallies, but again, if 10,000 people at a time, throughout the day, show up--- you can easily get 100,000. Also, as a veteran of some of the DC political rallies, if the musical talent is good enough, you can get a REALLY big crowd

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#47)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:17 PM EST
    D.C. Police Chief Charles H. Ramsey, who walked the march route, said the protesters achieved the goal of 100,000 and probably exceeded it.
    Absolute nonsense, Jim. You don't "believe" that, do you? ;-)

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#48)
    by ras on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:17 PM EST
    The Left can use any crowd-estimation numbers its wants. If the numbers are indeed grossly inflated, then - as with biased opinion polling, for example - it will only serve to provide them with false feedback, encouraging ineffective political strategies and unpopular positions, and resulting in the Left being shocked when they lose at the polls. I wonder if that's ever happened before?

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#49)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:17 PM EST
    ras: Have you been in touch with D.C. Police Chief Charles H. Ramsey, and verified that he is in fact a left-leaning democrat, providing an estimate of "numbers are indeed grossly inflated"? He's a personal acquaintance of yours is he? In that case I defer to your learned wisdom...

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#50)
    by ras on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:17 PM EST
    Edgar, You miss my pt. It matters not what the DC Police Chief thinks or what he says. Maybe he's inflating the numbers to make his force look good, maybe not. I don't esp care; in fact, as someone who thinks Leftism has long since been proven a failure, I kinda hope he did inflate the numbers, the more the better. But regardless whether it's deliberate or accidental inflation, or how plausible the numbers are or are not - if the numbers have been pumped up, then the Left is relying on false feedback, with consequences as I noted earlier. If the numbers do turn out to have been accurate, then the Left will do wonderfully in the next presidential election. If not, then they are shadow-boxing themselves instead of fighting their opponent in the ring. [One small caveat: last time around, the rallies were much larger than even what's being claimed here, yet Bush won anyway with a record number of votes, implying that larger rallies of several million will be needed to truly indicate a popular opposition to his policies large enough to indicate it has spread beyond the existing, and proven-electorally-insufficient, minority of '04.] Me, I think the Left is indeed deluding itself about its support, and that many of Lefties, esp those in the media, are contributing to that delusion with false feedback, their egos-in-the-moment trumping their need for proper feedback, same as last time around. Wishful thinking is no way to win a battle. But the real pt is, we'll see. No need to argue. Last time around, a vote settled the q. It will do so again in '08.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#51)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:17 PM EST
    Wishful thinking indeed... oh, well.. President Bush's Approval Ratings Track President Bush's job approval rating over the course of his presidency.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#52)
    by ras on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:17 PM EST
    Edgar, We've been thru this before: in between elections, when people aren't really paying much attention, R support drops cuz the MSM are heavily pro-D and people casually pick up on that. Come election time, tho, people do pay attention again, and R's do much, much better when it counts. Empiricaly, this has been the undisputed pattern for a generation now (remember Michael Dukakis and his 17 pt lead in the polls?), as the R's have gone from perpetual minority to control of the House, the Senate and the Presidency. Oh, and the majority of governorships, too. I quite like the polls these days, as I see it as more false feedback for the Left. Perfect, same as the polls leading up to '04. But, as I say; we'll see in '08. One q for you, however, a serious one: if R's do win again in '06 and '08, (ignoring the silly conspiracy theories of the Earthy Ernestos and Pinnie La La's and the like that would follow), what substantive changes would you then advocate for the Left? Just curious. [and to answer the same q myself, if the Left were to win big in those years, I would then advocate that R's return to stricter fiscal responsibility, increased federalism, and tighter immigrationq]

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#53)
    by Che's Lounge on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:17 PM EST
    I don't know the exact number but it was WAY over 2000! JR, you are a scream but you are way overpaid. The right wing posters (and "social liberals") have gathered here to tell us how insignificant the rally was. But their efforts are telling us more than that.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#54)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:17 PM EST
    ras:
    ..what substantive changes would you then advocate for the Left?
    As you've indicated you would, ras, I also would I would then advocate a return to stricter fiscal responsibility. On that we agree. Where we may part though is on the cost of conducting the campaign in Iraq, and also on the morality of going in there in the first place. But , we are in now, and responsible for what happens to the Iraqis now. Accountability, truthfullness, honesty and responsibility in leadership is something I want very much to see, and think you do too if you are honest, and I have no reason to think you are not. Any reasonable person wants that. In my opinion do not see this now from republicans. I don't know that a democratic administration will do better in those areas, but I doubt very much they could do worse than what we've seen since 2001. I also agree with you that "R's do much, much better when it counts", but only in gaining power... not in providing honest leadership, and I think that democrats, and the left generally, would be making a serious error if they get too comfortable and relax efforts because polls trend the way they have lately. The hardball game has to be played out in earnest, the messages have to be be loud, clear, constant, and direct. The grassroots slogging has to be done, and the left has to work harder at winning the next election than last time around.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#55)
    by cpinva on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:17 PM EST
    wow, the right has become so baseless, they've resurrected that old hoary tale of "us being forced to leave vietnam because of anti-war protests". guess what? it was a lie in 72, and, in spite of the passage of 33 years, it's still a lie. we left vietnam because no one knew what the hell they were doing there, or so my father's comrades told him and me, as they strongly urged him to retire, rather than shipping off to saigon in 68. these were guys who were gungy to the core, who thought being a marine was the best thing you could ever possibly hope to be. veterans of many conflicts, they recognized that there was a total breakdown at both the civilian and military leadership levels. why die for a cause that couldn't be articulated clearly, and seemed to have been started with a lie? sound familiar? the tet offensive of jan., 68, proved, beyond all doubt, that the u.s. intelligence services had no clue whatever. that was the true lesson of that engagement. counting bodies isn't a good way to tell if you're winning, when the enemy can attack every major city, and you don't have even the slightest notion it's about to happen. this is being repeated, daily, in iraq. again, our intelligence services haven't a clue. in vietnam, they dropped vc who didn't talk out of choppers, as an example. in iraq, they beat suspect insurgents in prisons. the results are the same: nothing of value is gained, and we just make more enemies. i've yet to hear of any anti-war protestors refer to those in iraq as "baby killers", yet. they want them home, in one piece. if anyone's responsible for improving the morale of the insurgents, it would be bushco, for starting a war with no planning, not enough boots on the ground, and no clue how to end it.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#56)
    by Sailor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:17 PM EST
    From the AP:
    About 100 people had gathered before a stage set up on the eastern portion of the mall as the noon rally began. ... Earlier, Taylor said organizers were prepared for 20,000 people to attend the pro-military rally
    To the west, near the Washington Monument, workers were taking down the stage used for Saturday's marathon anti-war protest that attracted 100,000 people according to police estimates.
    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#57)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    Myself:
    The hardball game has to be played out in earnest, the messages have to be be loud, clear, constant, and direct. The grassroots slogging has to be done, and the left has to work harder at winning the next election than last time around.
    The left also needs to run a candidate next time whose fundamental message is "Accountability, truthfullness, honesty and responsibility in leadership", and one who can and will explain how he or she will provide that. Kerry's biggest mistake was in not clearly getting that across last time. "vote for me because i'm not bush" won't cut it. We, not just the left, but the whole country, need a leader who offers that oldtime vague undefinable thing called "vision". Undefinable, but you know it when you see it. If America is going to lead, if America is going to fulfil it's promise, if America wants the world to again look up to her, then America must show the world an America the world CAN look up to. Idealistic? Yes... Of course. The country was built on ideals...

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#58)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    B.B. King Blues On The Bayou (1998) You're On Top (Blues In 'G') Yes you're on the top now, baby But don't nothing stay the same Hey you're on the top now, baby But don't nothing stay the same Every now and then, baby Lady luck deals another hand You're calling me your pal now When I used to be your man Hey you're calling me your pal now, baby When I used to be your man You're flying real high now, baby Go on and raise your sand I realize now, baby Your kind of love ain't true Hey I realize now, baby Your kind of love won't do Well what should've been, baby Now has all fell through...


    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#59)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    cpinva - It was true then and it is true now. The Left doesn't want to admit because they would have to take responsibility for all those who died because of their actions. I ask you. Are you incapable of understanding that the morale of the enemy, especially when we are talking guerilla terrorists, is extremely important? Are you incapable of understanding that the enemy's morale must be improved when he sees demonstrations against the war? What do you think they say:
    "Hey look! Demonstrations demanding that the Anerican troops leave Iraq! Quick! We must surrender!"
    I mean, just how dense can the Left be if they don't recognize that helping the morale of the enemy hurts our troops? edger - Before I believe anything I look for motive. The Police have no reason for making the numbers smaller. They do have reasons for making them larger for the reason I stated. I mean the Left has been saying the same thing about the military’s body count for years and years.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#60)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    Jim:
    The Police have no reason for making the numbers smaller. They do have reasons for making them larger for the reason I stated.
    It's ok, Jim... It never happened, Chief Ramsey was hallucinating, there was no protest, there was no one there, there is no opposition, the news stories are all anecdotal reports produced by rabid, commie-pinko, atheist, leftwing, gay/lesbian, cracked-out, drunk, naked acidheads who all graduated with liberal arts degrees, totally disconnected from reality, bent on total destruction of society, with nothing better to do with their time than pi** you off... Everything is fine, go back to sleep...

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#61)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    cpinva writes:
    the tet offensive of jan., 68, proved, beyond all doubt, that the u.s. intelligence services had no clue whatever. that was the true lesson of that engagement.
    The real question isn't whether what "intelligence" knew, but did you win? Let's see what someone from North Vietnam says, not what the MSM and Walter Cornkite said.
    In a recent interview published in The Wall Street Journal, former colonel Bui Tin who served on the general staff of the North Vietnamese Army and received the unconditional surrender of South Vietnam on April 30, 1975 confirmed the American Tet 1968 military victory: "Our loses were staggering and a complete surprise. Giap later told me that Tet had been a military defeat, though we had gained the planned political advantages when Johnson agreed to negotiate and did not run for reelection.
    And if you still don't think morale is important, try the below:
    Visits to Hanoi by Jane Fonda and former Attorney General Ramsey Clark and ministers gave us confidence that we should hold on in the face of battlefield reverses. We were elated when Jane Fonda, wearing a red Vietnamese dress, said at a press conference that she was ashamed of American actions in the war and would struggle along with us .... those people represented the conscience of America .... part of it's war- making capability, and we turning that power in our favor."
    Link

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#62)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    edger - Who can disagree with such elegant writing?

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#63)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    Jim I disagree and I realize you feel strongly about this issue. I think the overwhelming reason we failed in Vietnam was a total lack of understanding on the part of those involved in planning the war. They had little knowledge regarding everything from terrain to culture to the goals of the enemy. I think your accusations against the left give them far too much credit, while it gives far too little credit to the well planned strategy of the North Vietnamese. I tend to think the low morale of the troops came not from hippies protesting the war, but the ruthless campaign waged by the VC. No one wanted to go to Vietnam because it was a death trap for American troops. From beginning to end Vietnam remained un-familiar, chaotic, and desolate. Soldiers felt there no set plan to capture the country and create a viable government most Vietnamese accept. These things hurt morale far more then all of the accusations against Abbie Hoffman or any other member of leftists groups during the 1960s.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#64)
    by ras on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    PPJ, Let the Left believe the numbers. If the numbers are false, then believing them can only hurt the Left's chances of victory. Win-win! [btw, this marks my 4th, and therefore of necessity, my last comment of the day. Uncontested rebuttals may now be safely submitted. Soccerdad, this is usually where you demand links.]

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#65)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    GregZ writes:
    I tend to think the low morale of the troops came not from hippies protesting the war
    We did not leave Vietnam because of low morale of our troops. For the second time, the morale of our troops was not and is not the issue. The issue is why, and how, the Left aided and improved the morale of the enemy in Vietnam, and how they are now repeating it with demonstrations such as we had over the weekend, and all the loving attention paid to such people as Mrs. Sheehan by the MSM. Wars are not fought in a vacuum, and the realization that there is a vocal, active group of anti-war protestors within the US cannot do anything but cheer the terrorists our troops are fighting. Greg, you are an intelligent person. Put yoursef if the terrorists' shoes and you will instantly understand.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#66)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    Well I think the Vietcong and the insurgent group in Iraq are entirely different entities. I would be reluctant to discuss them both in general. Your argument is much more compelling regarding Vietnam, then the present day situation. At least you have Giap, but even that evidence seems lacking. As far as the ME, in some ways I agree with general assessments that have been made about terrorists. These dedicated few that preach a violent overthrow of world order would indeed want the protests to continue, but you have yet to explain how that aids the enemy, especially if it has nothing to do with morale. Does it boost the morale of the enemy? Cut off funding for necessary materials?

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#67)
    by cpinva on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    jim, on a daily basis, you prove, without exception, that you are a complete imbecile, incapable of analyzing facts, to come to a supportable conclusion. giap was wrong. uncle walter was right, but not for the reasons he thought. yes, the vc & nva suffered staggering casualties, far more than they had anticipated. so what? ultimately, they won, we lost, let's call the whole thing off. as usual, you miss the obvious point, which i very clearly stated in my post. get the blinders off guy, they don't look that stylish, and you keep blundering into things. the tet offensive clearly showed the complete failure of the intelligence services of the u.s., military and civilian. that 150,000 troops, with materials and supplies, were able to mass, totally unnoticed, around every major city in s.v., and take everyone by surprise, is as scathing an indictment of the intelligence gathering sector as can be made. i don't know how much simpler i can make it for you jim. we didn't have a clue, none, nada, period, end of discussion. that's what caused the anti-war protests in this country: it became clear that it was a losing cause, because our civilian and military leadership totally failed us and the troops. forget body counts. had that truly mattered to the north, we'd have won going away. it didn't. they were willing to sacrifice their entire population for the cause, something we just never figured out. that's the true lesson of vietnam, as it has been true for every human conflict since og first climbed out of the primordial ooze: know your enemy. clausewitz & sun tzu, et al. we violated the cardinal rule of warfare, and paid the price. colin powell understood this in gulf I, bush hasn't the foggiest notion. nor, do his minions. the same holds true in iraq, though at the moment (thankfully), the bad guys don't have an obvious patron, like china or the soviet union. god help us if iran or syria decides it might be in their interests to take a more prominent role, we will be f*cked.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#68)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    GeegZ writes:
    but you have yet to explain how that aids the enemy, especially if it has nothing to do with morale. Does it boost the morale of the enemy?
    Greg, did you bother to read this from my earlier comment?
    Visits to Hanoi by Jane Fonda and former Attorney General Ramsey Clark and ministers gave us confidence that we should hold on in the face of battlefield reverses. We were elated when Jane Fonda, wearing a red Vietnamese dress, said at a press conference that she was ashamed of American actions in the war and would struggle along with us .... those people represented the conscience of America .... part of it's war- making capability, and we turning that power in our favor."
    What the protests did was increase the morale of the enemy. It convinced them that if they could hang on the US congress would withdraw the troops, and they would win. And by doing so, Americans and thousands, some say millions, were killed in the long drawn out conflict. Iraq is not the same, but the Left is teaching the terrorists leaders the same lesson. The demonstrations improve their morale, and tell them to hang on in hopes political discord in the US will cause us to withdraw the troops, and they will win. And, as in Vietnam, Americams and thousands of others will be killed because the terrorists will believe they can win a political settlement, brokered by the demonstrations and protests of the Left.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#69)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    you have one example Jim and a few quotes. The VC was not fighting any harder b/c of the American left, they were winning the war because of a better plan and they saw victory in the grasp. Like I said you give the left far too much credit.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#70)
    by soccerdad on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    Brownshirt PPJ wants us all to give up our basic feedoms and just bow down to the all powerful state. Yet this all powerfuls state has been unable to justify this war, and as now known with certainty they lied to start the war much like they are doing now with Iran. PPJ likes the fascist state as long as he thinks he's on their side. The US will lose this war not because of any protests, but simply because they fought a war without a plan except to shock and awe the Iraqis into submission. In all of history at some point the imperialist country loses and leaves. In the end the MidEast from a geopolitical viewpoint will be much worse off that before we started. Of course the US cannot invade Iran, so tactical nukes and cruise missles will be the weapons of choice. The financial burden to this country cause by his insane fiscal policies coupled with the war and natural diasters will cause enormous harm to our country for a long time and will certainly bring out the isolationists in force. This first, of probably many, wars for the earth's limited resources has been an unmitigated diaster. The call for the end to dissent is the last refuge of desperate cowards, of which PPJ is one.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#71)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    cpinva - Hmmmm, let me see. First you write:
    you prove, without exception, that you are a complete imbecile, incapable of analyzing facts, to come to a supportable conclusion.
    And then you immediately write:
    giap was wrong. uncle walter was right
    Now let me understand this. The North Vietnamense General doesn't know what he was talking about when he said he lost, but a network news person does when he said the US lost. Shades of "Fake but accurate." What doublespeak. The next time you want to call someone an imbecile I strongly suggest you do it looking directly into a mirror at your own image. Again, oh most superior one, let me explain about winning wars. First you must win battles. Good intelligence is needed and very helpful. BUT BATTLES WON ARE BATTLES WON AND IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY DIFFERENCE ABOUT HOW ACCURATE THE INTELLIGENCE IS EXCEPT TO THOSE INVOLVED IN THE FIGHT. You write:
    that's what caused the anti-war protests in this country:
    So, based on the above you say that Conkrite's wrong call about the battle caused the protests. Then, could it be if Cronkrite had called it a victory the protests would not have happened? You write:
    ....forget body counts. had that truly mattered to the north, we'd have won going away.
    Actually, if you will do a bit or research instead of just accepting whatever excuse the Left wants to use on any given day, you will discover that Giap was ready to sue for peace after Tet. That he did not was because the demontsrations told him he could win if he just hung in, killed more Americans, avoided any major battles because he didn't have the resources, and wait for the Left to force Congress into quitting.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#72)
    by soccerdad on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    Of course PPj treats N. Vietnamese generals as paragons of truth who are obviously unbiased and without political agendas. Everyone else is a liar. Pathetic, but how else is he to support the fascist regime but to limit our freedoms.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#73)
    by Kitt on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    cpinva - Yep, you're absolutely correct about the enlistment oath. I remember because it struck me at the time (and I tell this always) that the thing I was called to do was to "support & defend the Constitution....I will bear true faith & allegiance to the same...." and how as radical as I was during my SDS days, I could do it.
    I (_____) do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God." (Title 10, US Code; Act of 5 May 1960 replacing the wording first adopted in 1789, with amendment effective 5 October 1962).
    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#74)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    SD – Actually the quotes were from a WSJ interview. Obviously a suspect source. The link can be read. BTW – I note you don’t provide links anymore. Out of gas, or just a limited source. You write:
    Everyone else is a liar. Pathetic, but how else is he to support the fascist regime but to limit our freedoms.
    Now, that is a nice little personal attack from a sideways direction. But show me SD, where have I called anyone a liar? I did question the motive of the “demonstration organizers,” and the Chief of Police. But liars? No, didn’t do it. Wouldn’t be prudent. ;-) And perhaps you can explain what you mean by saying that I support fascist regimes by limiting “our” freedoms? Tell us how I am limiting anyone’s freedom? Frankly I didn’t know I had that power. Perhaps I can hire myself out to Castro or some other icon of the Left.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#75)
    by glanton on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    "Tell us how I am limiting anyone’s freedom?" By voting Republican. By consistently speaking on behalf of Republicans. You may not approve of the GOP's social policies, Jim, but your vote gets the last word.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#76)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    White House press secretary Ari Fleischer Office of the Press Secretary February 6, 2003
    "It is emphatically a patriotic act for people to protest on behalf of whatever cause they see fit in our country. And if some differ with the President and call for the use of no force and take to the streets peacefully to protest that, that's the finest tradition of America. It's not new. It's been the way the American people communicate with their government for hundreds of years. We settle our differences in this country through elections and through peaceful protest."


    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#77)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    Link: Office of the Press Secretary February 6, 2003

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#78)
    by soccerdad on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    And perhaps you can explain what you mean by saying that I support fascist regimes by limiting “our” freedoms?
    By calling for an end to dissent of the war in order to protect Bush. But thats what cowards do.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#79)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    glanton - it's amazing how you fail to understand that people can honestly disagree with you. And, before soccerdad amazes us all by misunderstanding that, I do believe that the anti-war protesters have a right to do what they do. Will they be effective? Unlikely. Will they convince anyone in the center via the kind of show they put on yesterday? Even more unlikely. What you might ponder is that - even at the height of the Vietnam war, with an active draft - the country still refused to vote for the anti-war candidate. But hey - go ahead and knock yourselves out. Republicans thought they had Clinton on the ropes in 1997 and 1998 too, and all it got them was a few lost seats in the mid-term elections in 1998.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#80)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    Oh, for crying out loud... I participated in the protest, and I can honestly say there were FAR more than only 2000 people there. The CSPAN coverage, from what I've heard, focused mainly on the speakers, some of whom appeared while the march was still going strong. The smaller crowd you see on that footage is because many of us were still walking (and walking, and walking...) There were thousands of people there, all gathered together to support the same cause: ending this pointless war. There were people of every sort there, all working together for peace, all supporting eachother, and all trying to keep from tearing up when faced with the reality of our losses. Hung upon a string were the pictures of all our fallen soldiers: it was in alphabetical order, and although I was only helping to hold up the "B's", I could not see the beginning of the line, much less the end. Photographs of 1900 young men and women will stretch for blocks. My friends and I led a cheer that echoed down the street and around the block, and we ran on ahead, yelling "Tell me what Democracy looks like? This is what Democracy looks like!", jumping around and getting the crowd fired up. It was such an amazing feeling, knowing that everyone there felt like I did, and cared enough about the world to simply want the violence to end. And then, of course, we met the counterprotesters. One of them pointed at me, and screamed "GO HOME, WHORE!". I was so angry I was shaking, and for a minute I regretted being a Quaker, as I wanted to tear this guy a new one. I was wearing jeans and a sweatshirt, looking as un-whorish as possible, but apparently the act of speaking out makes any woman a prostitute. Good to know. Anyway, my point is this: before you go trashing the protest and making stuff up, you might want to consider asking someone who was there. Also...did CSPAN cover any of the musical events from last night, asside from Joan Baez who played durring the march? I think having CSPAN discuss Le Tigre would possibly be the greatest thing ever.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#81)
    by soccerdad on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    Well at least JR is not a coward who favors the limitation of dissent. And I'm afraid I have to agree with him that the antiwar movement will not bring an end to this war. Even the Dems for the most part are for this war because they know what it is about (oil) and understand the cost if we lose we might lose access to the planet's biggest supply of oil. So you will get no support from the Dems, In addition, history has proven that the average American doesn't care about foreigners being killed by us as long as they don't have to see it on TV or in the papers. We need some photos like these But the troops will come home and the US will lose because there is no plan except shock and awe and the US citizens will tire of the cost, not the blood, bodies or babies killed, but the dollars which will eventually catch up and cause major problems for the economy. Note that the Independent is reporting that there is increasing participation by Shias in the attacks on the US and British. So the insurgency grows. Imperialistic wars always end badly for the aggressor, it might not be right away but eventually they have to give up and go home

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#82)
    by Sailor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    War protestors 100,000+, war supporters 200 when they hoped for 20,000. 60% of the american people are agaist the war are against the war. The wrongwingers on this site have been marginalized and it's easy to tell, they just keep getting more shrill and spouting more outrageous lies. (e.g. Jand Fonda lost the war in VN and only 2000 showed up in DC.) It's amazing that these people will support anyone (see NV generals) or slime anyone (see DC Chief of cops) depending on how desperate they are. Ahhh, they are more to be pitied than censored;-)

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#83)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    Based on CSpan's coverage, and Yahoo pics I saw (sorry, I lost track of the link), I'd estimate the anti-war crowd (total, including streets) in the 10k - 20k range. Based on the CSpan coverage, the crowd got very tired of the speakers very fast - by the time Sheehan spoke, there were maybe a few hundred there on the ellipse. Maybe the constant off topic speeches had something to do with that. Amongst other things, the anti-war crowd desperately needs a marketing manager who can enforce message control. As to the pro-war rally - I saw no coverage of it, and no wide screen pics - so I can't say anything about the numbers. I'd guess that 20k is high, solely on the same basis that the 100k estimate for the Saturday rally was high.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#84)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    sailor - Marginalized? Nope, don't think so. But you know, I have spent my life not giving a flip about what the "majority" thought. I try to focus on "truth." Try it sometimes. SD - Don't misquote me by saying something that I haven't said. I don't favor limitation of debate. What I favor is for the Left to educate itself to the point that they will just quit their terrible practices. Quarble writes:
    Hung upon a string were the pictures of all our fallen soldiers: it was in alphabetical order, and although I was only helping to hold up the "B's", I could not see the beginning of the line, much less the end. Photographs of 1900 young men and women will stretch for blocks.
    Now, you've had your fun, are you ready to step up to the plate and just say: "What I did today had to improve the morale of those who killed these young men?"

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#85)
    by roger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    JR- You're right, the "left" has needed a new marketing manager for years. Even with a better message, the left sucks at projecting that. Charley, Before you stereotype, I'm about as left as they get around here, and I am rabidly pro-Israel. We are not Hershey's kisses.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#86)
    by soccerdad on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    PPJ - you cant parse your way out of that nonsense.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#88)
    by Sailor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    I try to focus on "truth." Try it sometimes.
    ppj, quoting someone is not a personal attack, calling them a liar is. You frequently ignore the substance of someone's remarks to attack them personally. It's well know on this site that I castigate folks equally for personal attacks and NSFW comments. Your replies have been 'You're too sensitive', 'You're not the mom' and 'he started it'. TL, how consistent is that 'comment policy' on name calling? ppj constantly makes personal attacks and engages in name calling. Is it possible to revisit mr charlie's status also, IRT racist comments? The constant trolls and hijacking by mr charlie labeling anyone who disagrees with him as a jew hater are really becoming tiresome. Especially when they have zero relation to the topic. BTW, et al, VN wasn't lost because an actress went to NVN, it was lost because 55,000+ americans died in a country that had not attacked us and had no power to attack us and was started by us on a lie (see Gulf Of Tonkin.) Once enough of those facts were known the public turned against the war.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#89)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    Jim:
    "What I did today had to improve the morale of those who killed these young men?"
    That is a vile, foul, and despicably low blow. Unworthy even of you, Jim. Look into your own eyes in a mirror if you can stand the sight, and ask yourself that question. And before you answer, think about the support at all costs, even in the face of facts that have contradicted your stated opinions on nearly every topic in every thread on this site, that you so gratuitously give to the deceitful little killers who sent them there. You are not here for reasoned debate, you are here only to stroke your own worthless ego. You cannot lift yourself by trying to drag others down to your disgusting level.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#90)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    "What would the child I once was, think of the adult I have become?"

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#91)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    Sailor, TL --- I for one would not agree with any suggestion that Jim should be banned or limited. As we can only know day as not night, and light in contrast with darkness, beauty in opposition to foulness, we can only recognize sanity by it's departure, and humanity by what it is not.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#92)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    sailor - Call people names? You mean like cpinva call me an imbecile? You mean like edger inviting me to:
    Jim... you know how to use a gun? Bullets are cheap, and plentiful, you can get lots of 'em almost anywhere if you are out of 'em...
    You mean like Squaky saying:
    “Rove never needed proof for his smear machine, why should I”
    Do you mean like Paul in LA saying:
    And then you can just go back to BUTT-LICKING your fellow racists”.
    Or this from Pail In LA? Funny is watching his toes curl when he is hanging from his neck.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#93)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    Pardon the repeat, but somehow I hit post while trying to preview. sailor - Calling people names? You mean like cpinva calling me an imbecile? You mean like edger inviting me to:
    Jim... you know how to use a gun? Bullets are cheap, and plentiful, you can get lots of 'em almost anywhere if you are out of 'em...
    You mean like Squaky saying:
    “Rove never needed proof for his smear machine, why should I”
    Do you mean like Paul in LA saying:
    And then you can just go back to BUTT-LICKING your fellow racists”.
    Do you mean like Paul in LA saying:
    Jim is an old tart with a whore's taste in men.
    (Actually I though Paul had improved his ability until I Googled and found he had copied it... oh well, such is life.) And BTW - In the interest of accuracy, Paul wasn't speaking of me when he wrote:
    Funny is watching his toes curl when he is hanging from his neck.
    sailor, you don't want a debate, you want to be editor. And your vision of free speech is whatever sailor says it is. edger - Talk is cheap. Show me. I don't think you can, outside of my reliance on a WaPost article, which I admitted. Come on, edger. Ask TL for an open thread and show us. et al - Not a single one of you have even tried to dispute my contention that demonstrations by anti-war activists in the US improve the morale of the terrorists our troops are fighting against. You complain about my presenting the facts, but you can't dispute them.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#94)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    Leonard Cohen - Anthem
    Ah the wars they will be fought again The holy dove She will be caught again bought and sold and bought again the dove is never free. Ring the bells that still can ring Forget your perfect offering There is a crack in everything That's how the light gets in.


    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#95)
    by Sailor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    'He started it!' is not a defense for one's incivility. As a matter of fact it is standard wingnut reponse
    Two Wrongs Make A Right
    (AKA logical fallacy #42) IRT
    Not a single one of you have even tried to dispute my contention that demonstrations by anti-war activists in the US improve the morale of the terrorists our troops are fighting against.
    The logical fallacies committed here are #s 17 Burden of Proof and #19 Begging the Question. (See above link.) Back on topic; The anti-war protest may encourage the many factions of iraqis that want us to leave, tho w/o electricity or a free press it may be difficult for them to hear about it. The pro-war contingent only encourages terrorists, just like 'Mission Accomplished", "Crusade", "Axis of evil", "My God is mightier than theirs", "Bring 'em on" has encouraged terrorists.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#96)
    by Che's Lounge on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    One of my favorites is: "Major combat operations in Iraq have ended." May, 2003

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#97)
    by Ernesto Del Mundo on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    PPJ:
    Given that you sometimes appear rational, can you tell us why no bribes have ever been proven?
    When I say bribe I mean the following: Special interest group or wealthy individual gives big money contribution to candidate. Candidate then espouses legislation that helps out special interest group or wealthy individual. That is standard procedure in our political system and we call it such things as "buying influence", etc...and some even have the nerve to call it "freedom of speech". But by any other name, it is still a bribe.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#98)
    by Ernesto Del Mundo on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    ras:
    btw, this marks my 4th, and therefore of necessity, my last comment of the day. Uncontested rebuttals may now be safely submitted.
    Yeah like it matters since you said the same crap-ola in the first 3 posts. Perhaps you have been safely ensconced in a cocoon in your socialist paradise of Canada, but Americans saw exactly what a crock the Bush pledge of "protecting the homeland" turned out to be. The 2002 and 2004 elections hinged on the "War on Terra" which has since been exposed as a huge scam by certain recent hydrological events. So good luck in 2006 with your predictions. The rightwingers will be praying hard for another terrorist attack before then to get their mojo back out of the floodwaters.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#99)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    The wingers are whirring like the maniacs they are. In 2006, the vote fraud regime BUSH and his crony backers put into place for their coup will STILL be denying auditable papertrails to a majority of US states. So don't get your hopes up about 'results' until we can AUDIT the results. My friends in Texas tell me that W stickers are coming off cars like leaves falling in autumn -- and they won't be growing back in spring.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#100)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    edger says: "Perhaps you have been safely ensconced in a cocoon in your socialist paradise of Canada, but Americans saw exactly what a crock the Bush pledge of "protecting the homeland" turned out to be. The 2002 and 2004 elections hinged on the "War on Terra" which has since been exposed as a huge scam by certain recent hydrological events." And yet, since 9/11, no terrorist attacks on US soil. Oddly quiet about that fact, aren't you? The hurricanes? First off, the raw incompetence of Blanco and nagin is plain - all you need to do is compare the responses in Texas, Mississippi, Alabama, and Florida - and realize that the difference was all in the local leadership. The FEMA leadership was the same throughout, and only one area really screwed the pooch. As to the levees - you might have a look at the LSU data on the problem. It seems that the levees weren't overtopped, and the storm surge was within the bounds of what the levees were supposed to have stopped. Somehow, money that should have gone into the levees got diverted locally. Huge surprise there.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#101)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    sailor writes:
    Back on topic; The anti-war protest may encourage the many factions of iraqis that want us to leave, tho w/o electricity or a free press it may be difficult for them to hear about it.
    Neat dodge, but we all know that the issue is the leadership of the terrorists. And we all know that they read newspapers listen to radio, watch TV and use the Internet. It is a wired world, dear sailor. To pretend that they live in a vacuum that doesn't know what is going on in the US begs the issue.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#102)
    by soccerdad on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    And yet, since 9/11, no terrorist attacks on US soil. Oddly quiet about that fact, aren't you?
    So what? They can attack us overthere and save on transportation. The purpose of the 9/11 attack was to draw the US into a long drawn out war in Afghanistan, just like the Russians. The US quickly disposed of the Taliban thwarting bin laden's plan but then turned around and invaded Iraq which was the biggest present anyone could have given bin Laden. So his plan is working. We were drawn into an unwinnable war that will financially bankrupt us. And that was the plan all along.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#103)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    Ernesto wrote:
    Which came first, the Diebold or the bribe?
    While almost anyone can agree that influence buying is a time honored practice praticed by both sides in our system, your quoted comment is specific. Now if you are saying that it is not correct and that you were just ranting, I will understand.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#104)
    by Ernesto Del Mundo on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    "...we all know that the issue is the leadership of the terrorists. And we all know that they read newspapers listen to radio, watch TV and use the Internet. It is a wired world, dear sailor. To pretend that they live in a vacuum that doesn't know what is going on in the US begs the issue." Wow, just think what we could do if we had leaders that didn't live in a vacuum!

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#105)
    by Ernesto Del Mundo on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    PPJ...I was saying that the Diebolding of America could only occur under the system of legalized bribery that currently exists. If money didn't buy policy there would be no incentive to steal elections for the bought-off candidate of choice.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#106)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:18 PM EST
    Ernesto - You beg the issue, and strawman aside, sailor's contention that the terrorist don't know about what is happening in America is totally incorrect.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#107)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:19 PM EST
    et al - If you are interested, here is a link, "Al Qaeda Thanks Them," that you may find interesting. It is stuffed with other links of interest.
    The Workers World Party was there, but so was International ANSWER. They had separate tables but are not really separate groups. The veil came off, as we noted in our release on Friday, when one of the leaders of the WWP and ANSWER posted an article urging "solidarity" with the "Iraqi fighters" and "resistance" killing American troops and innocent civilians in Iraq.
    A friend of my enemy is my friend, eh?

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#108)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:19 PM EST
    Jim, you stated that:
    Not a single one of you have even tried to dispute my contention that demonstrations by anti-war activists in the US improve the morale of the terrorists our troops are fighting against.
    So far I've seen multiple posts disputing your claim. A claim which is only your shouted, repeated ad nauseum opinion, and your holding up as supporting evidence the statements of others, as if you are somehow magically privy to their thoughts and motivations. You also stated:
    You complain about my presenting the facts, but you can't dispute them.
    But I have yet to see you attempt to deny, refute or explain "the support at all costs [...] that you so gratuitously give to the deceitful little killers who sent them there." and I don't expect to... You demand that others dipute your statements... it's time you put your money where your mouth is. I notice that you haven't even bothered to deny, much less dispute, that:
    You are not here for reasoned debate, you are here only to stroke your own worthless ego.
    much less dispute or explain your reasons for it. You can take your time, Jim. I'm leaving for work. I don't have the time nor the inclination to take the time, anymore, to pay attention to your childish, foul, spewing.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#109)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:19 PM EST
    edger wrote:
    I don't have the time nor the inclination to take the time, anymore, to pay attention to your childish, foul, spewing.
    Childish? Foul? Spewing? You are the one who said:
    Jim... you know how to use a gun? Bullets are cheap, and plentiful, you can get lots of 'em almost anywhere if you are out of 'em...
    Do you think that statement is "adult?" Sweet? Mellow? Dispute? Prove? I provided links that clarly demonstrate what common sense tells us. That when something is done that improves the morale of the enemy, it has to harm our military. I invite your attention to: "Posted by JimakaPPJ at September 25, 2005 12:34 PM" Please read the quotations, and the link. I posted another link at 7:48AM (above) showing the connections beweem our enemies, and how they are involved in the protest. You, on the other hand have posted links about oil fields, SD has posted links showing war pictures, DA postd a link talking about al-Qaida supposedly enjoying Iraq, sailor postd a link to a site that supposedly is about debates, Molly Bloom posted a link discussing the internal politics of the anti-war movement, and you posted song lyrics..... But no one has shown any proof that I am wrong. Let us seem some links, edger. Let us see links.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#110)
    by soccerdad on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:19 PM EST
    PPJ - just repeating something over and over doesn't make it true despite what your buddy Lenin says. Linking to N.Vietnam generals clearly isn't proof. Its amazing the criteria that you use when judging items you like versus the criteria you use when discussing items you don't like. Biggest hypocrite and blog bully ever.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#111)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:19 PM EST
    Jim my contention is that you simply don’t have enough evidence to claim this fact. A few quotes but that is about it. People are fighting against the American occupation for many reasons, but you have no direct evidence that anti-war protests around the globe are spawning/aiding terrorist actions in Iraq. If these insurgents are true zealots then their motivations seem spiritual/religious. If on the other hand their sole purpose is to kick America out of Iraq, then perhaps your argument would be more plausible. But it seems that this administration has labeled most of these people as fanatics, not 'freedom fighters.' I tend to agree with that notion somewhat, but you can’t have it both ways. Either these folks are bent on terrorism and establishing an Islamic empire/control of the ME. Some have argued the only way they can be stopped is with force. But now you seem to be stating that they ideologues who want to mobilize support in their quest for autonomy. So which is it? (and both is not an answer, al-Qadea has never been hell bent on nationalism)

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#112)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:19 PM EST
    *they are ideologues* sorry.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#113)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:19 PM EST
    GregZ - This is not a double blind FDA drug study. What we have here are direct statements by the military leaders of North Vietnam that:
    Visits to Hanoi by Jane Fonda and former Attorney General Ramsey Clark and ministers gave us confidence that we should hold on in the face of battlefield reverses.
    Now, whatever the reason for the terrorists fighting in Iraq, I think it flies directly in the face of common sense to believe that demonstrations demanding that we get out of Iraq, just as we had demonstrations that we get out of Vietnam, do not improve the morale of the terrorists and:
    gave us confidence that we should hold on in the face of battlefield reverses.
    Greg, although we have disagreed, I do think you see the connection. It is as simple as night following day. And even sailor admitted to it in his comment:
    the anti-war protest may encourage the many factions of iraqis that want us to leave, tho w/o electricity or a free press it may be difficult for them to hear about it.
    Although he did try and say it was difficult for them to hear about it. Of course difficult doesn't mean impossible and we all know we live in a wired world with almost instantaneous communications. And again, I am not saying we should force the demonstrations to stop. I again just say that I would hope they would see the damage they are doing, and quit. If they choose not to, then I think they know what they have done. And if successful, the results will be their child, their legacy and they will not be able to deny. SD - The link is there, and he said what he said. If you want to say he was lying, fine. You may deny forever, and it will change nothing. Why? Because it is just common sense. If you are in a war and you see that your enemy has political discord demanding that they quit fighting, it has to cheer you. It has to encourage you. SD, you are to smart not to see that.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#114)
    by soccerdad on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:19 PM EST
    The insurgents are encouraged by the fact that the US troops cannot secure the green zone from mortar attacks, or secure the road to the airport, or improve basic services,and by the fact that they don't have enough troops to secure any of the country. They are encouraged by the fact that the US indiscriminately kills civilians thus angering the people of Iraq and bringing more people to their cause. So do you want to talk about the real reasons the insurgents are encouraged or do you want to continue to lay the ground work to blame the left when the US is run out of Iraq. Thats waht I thought.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#115)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:19 PM EST
    soccerdad... They are encouraged by the fact that the US indiscriminately kills civilians. Link please? I'm not sure how it can be that hard for you (U.S. military hating) guys to keep from getting the good guys confused with your insurgent (aka - freedom fighter) heros..... but... they are the ones that indiscriminately kill civilians. Please try and keep that straight. Although we have (and continue) to fight for your freedom to say them, my friends in the military now, and all of us ex-military guys, take deep offense to your misguided and grossly untrue statements!

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#116)
    by soccerdad on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:19 PM EST
    BB - see the archives under Fallujah, the use of cluster bombs, etc. I've talked about this here ad nauseum. Both are killing civilians indiscriminatly, But for you Bush can do no wrong types you dont care, hey their only Muslims. Thats about it isn't it?

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#117)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:19 PM EST
    Posted by BB at September 26, 2005 01:16 PM
    soccerdad... They are encouraged by the fact that the US indiscriminately kills civilians. Link please?
    Iraqi civilians frequently complain that US troops open fire indiscriminately after they are attacked. 15 Iraqis dead after US gunfire: doctor ABC News Online Saturday, August 13, 2005. 7:39pm An attack on a US military patrol followed by heavy US gunfire has left 15 Iraqis, including eight children, dead and 17 wounded in a town west of Baghdad, residents said on Saturday. Iraqi civilians frequently complain that US troops open fire indiscriminately after they are attacked. Missile kills eight Iraqi civilians in Baghdad Hospital source reports eight civilians killed when missile hit vegetable market at Nahrawan in southern Baghdad. Middle East Online April 3, 2003 BAGHDAD - Eight civilians died and five were wounded Thursday by a missile that hit a vegetable market at Nahrawan on the southeastern edge of Baghdad, an Iraqi hospital source said. --- And on the other hand: Truth is the First Civilian Casualty Tens of thousands of Iraqis have died since 2003. But killings by U.S. troops are not nearly as common as the war’s critics would like us to believe. Web Exclusive BY Rod Nordland Newsweek Updated: 11:12 a.m. ET July 25, 2005

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#118)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:19 PM EST
    This is a human security project to establish an independent and comprehensive public database of media-reported civilian deaths in Iraq resulting directly from military action by the USA and its allies. This database includes up to 7,350 deaths which resulted from coalition military action during the "major-combat" phase prior to May 1st 2003. In the current occupation phase the database includes all deaths which the Occupying Authority has a binding responsibility to prevent under the Geneva Conventions and Hague Regulations. This includes civilian deaths resulting from the breakdown in law and order, and deaths due to inadequate health care or sanitation. Results and totals are continually updated and made immediately available on this page and on various IBC counters which may be freely displayed on any website, where they will be automatically updated without further intervention. Casualty figures are derived solely from a comprehensive survey of online media reports. Where these sources report differing figures, the range (a minimum and a maximum) are given

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#119)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:20 PM EST
    Jim I think that you need more quotes about Vietnam, not just Giap. If you find more, or others speak up that this did indeed boost morale, then by all means. My point was that just as you stated, Iraq is not Vietnam, and until you have direct evidence that these protests worldwide have had a direct effect on the insurgency your argument is lacking. I think the insurgents in Iraq could care less about the protests. We have seen they care little about whom their wrath is taken out upon. Just as some folks here see all Muslims as fanatics, they too think Americans are selfish, greedy and forceful in every aspect. Neither of these characterizations are accurate. By the way all could we have a civil discussion about some of these issues? The name calling and threats are getting a bit old.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#120)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:20 PM EST
    Soccerdad / Edger.... I read the first link and took away this sentence..... But the US military said its troops had not been involved in any firing in the area. How can you be sure it was a US fired missle anyway? Why do you ALWAYS doubt the US and blame 'your military' at the drop of a hat? I read the second link and took away this sentence....."US commanders and spokesmen say that forces loyal to Saddam Hussein may be deliberately harming their own people and then blaming the coalition for the actions". Hummm immagine that? I read the third link (written by a foriegner) and came away with this sentence .... In many places, coalition troops held their fire and slowed their advance for fear of causing greater civilian loss of life. Kinda blows your point out of the water doesn't it? And your comeback to that would be? So...what is your point? That in times of war, weapons miss targets...that innocent people are killed.... yes... all this is true. But to imply that US troops "purposely" targets civilians is BS! Especially when we ALL know that the 'other' guys do that and don't usually even try to hide it. Yet you all are so quick to blame the US for everything...it absolutely boggles mind mind. Call me names all you want.... Nothing I could call you would suffice at this point.... "Traitors" comes close tho...

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#121)
    by Kitt on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:20 PM EST
    Call me names all you want.... Nothing I could call you would suffice at this point.... "Traitors" comes close tho...
    As usual - still at it with nothing substantitive to say. Here's a picture taken from atop the Washington Monument of the Peace Rally on Saturday. One of my favorites.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#122)
    by Kitt on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:20 PM EST
    Here's another view of one of the pics taken from atop the Washington Monument: certainly more than James' estimate of 2,000. There's quite a few coming up 15th Street; 'the 2000' gathered on the Ellipse (another angle of 'The 2000').

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#123)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:20 PM EST
    In times of ILLEGAL INVASION, all sorts of crap happens. "Why do you ALWAYS doubt the US and blame 'your military' at the drop of a hat?" Because they are involved in WAR CRIMES and genocide. Once the military crosses the line of the UCMJ, which is founded on the Geneva Conventions, then you can kiss our support for the military goodbye. That doesn't mean we don't support the soldiers who fight within the UCMJ. We do -- far more than you.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#124)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:20 PM EST
    Paul: You claim it was an "illegal" invasion. Given the fact that Congress authorized the war, how do you arrive at "illegal"? All that's required under our Constitution is Congressional authorization. Oh, you might note in that link above - WMD was one of many, many reasons given by the Congress. Bottom line though, what's illegal? And don't bother tossing up the lack of UN authorization - that is not required in any way shape or form under US law - a fact that all Presidents - Democrat and Republican - have made clear since the founding of the UN.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#125)
    by Ernesto Del Mundo on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:20 PM EST
    Bottom line though, what's illegal?
    A war of agression is illegal. Best summed up at the Nuremburg Tribunal: Principle Vl The crimes hereinafter set out are punishable as crimes under; international law: a. Crimes against peace: i. Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances; ii. Participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the acts mentioned under (i). Also see here: "To initiate a war of aggression, therefore, is not only an international crime, it is the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole." -- International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg, 1946

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#126)
    by Ernesto Del Mundo on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:20 PM EST
    And before you jump in and make the distinction between national and international law, we can assume that Germany's 1939 invasion of Poland was perfectly legal under contemporary German law.

    Re: A Day of Protest (none / 0) (#127)
    by soccerdad on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:04:20 PM EST
    So by JR's logic, a Russian invasion of the US, approved by its government, is alos legal. Should we throw flowers too? How pathetic can you get. At some point, the bully always gets his butt kicked.

    A Day of Protest | 126 comments (126 topical)