[Drizzt]

289 Million Americans Avoid Peace Rallies

(2003-01-19) -- Police across the nation estimate the crowd that avoided yesterday's anti-war demonstrations at about 289 million. Americans from coast-to-coast voted in absentia against criticizing the Bush administration for Iraq's failure to comply with U.N. resolutions.

Anti-anti-war demonstrators gathered in grocery stores, shopping malls and private homes to proclaim their disagreement with protestors marching in the streets of Washington D.C. and San Francisco.

"Going about my regular Saturday routine is my way of saying I disagree with the radical left-wing agenda of the anti-Bush crowd," said college student Melanie Sampson, who spent the day preparing a term paper for a literature course.

Police reported no unusual problems with the droves that stayed away from the protests.

"It was a normal Saturday in America," said one Sheriff's deputy.

Posted by Scott Ott

http://www.scrappleface.com/MT/archives/000601.html#000601

[El Tejon]

That's because we had jobs unlike the anti-American crowd and had to be in the office to pay taxes to support the peaceniks.:D

[KY Moose]

Just check out the list of sponsors of the Anti-America marches. Good examples of socialist groups, pro-terrorist, and anti-Jewish types. Even saw some knuckle heads waiving the PLO and N Korean flags. They just don't want the US to attack their true learders and friends.

Boy, I would really like to have most of these groups as my sponsors.

http://www.internationalanswer.org/endorsers.html

Socialist Party USA
Act Now To Stop War and End Racism
Move On
New Communist Party of the Netherlands
Green Party USA
The progressive Common Dreams
Free Palestine Alliance
Workers World Party
Partnership for Civil Justice
Nicaragua Network
International Action Center
Muslim Student Association of the U.S./Canada
Kensington Welfare Rights Union
Mexico Solidarity Network
Ramsey Clark - former U.S. Attorney General
American Muslims for Global Peace
Al-Awda Palestine Right of Return Coalition
International Action Center, NYC
Deputy Ambassador-at-Large, Haiti
Muslim Student Association of Richland College, Dallas, Texas
Al-Awda Palestine Right of Return Coalition
Muslims Against Racism and War
Simmons College Feminist Union
International Family & Friends of Mumia Abu-Jamal
Left Turn
Heidelberg Forum
Retired Admiral, German Navy, Germany
AFSCME Local 1072
African Immigrant and Refugee Coalition
Dominican Workers Party, NYC
District Council 1707 AFSCME, NYC
National Lawyers Guild
Muslim Student & Faculty Association
transgender author and Co-Founder, Rainbow Flags for Mumia
UFCW Local 27, Baltimore, Maryland
Brooklyn Greens, Brooklyn, New York
Cuba Advocate Newsletter
SAFRAD Somali Association
Arab Cause Solidarity Committee, Madrid, Spain
Anti-Imperialist League, Belgium
Tri-Valley Communities Against a Radioactive Environment, California
California Prison Focus

[dadman]

From
http://www.antiwar.com/justin/justincol.html:
Forget the antiwar movement, and listen to General Anthony Zinni , the Marine Corps commander and former chief of the Central Command, who says:

"Attacking Iraq now will cause a lot of problems. I think the debate right now that's going on is very healthy. If you ask me my opinion, Gen. Scowcroft, Gen. Powell, Gen. Schwarzkopf, Gen. Zinni, maybe all see this the same way. It might be interesting to wonder why all the generals see it the same way, and all those that never fired a shot in anger and really hell-bent to go to war see it a different way. That's usually the way it is in history."



The Patriot Act and Homeland Security is anti-American.
Debate before making a final decision on war is needed. Would be nice if Congress earned their paycheck and issued a Constitutional declaration of war, after some rational debate.

[Malone LaVeigh]

There's a big debate going on over this in the anti-war movement. See recent issues of The Nation. All being a "sponsor" means is they put up some money to have a table at the rally site. There are a lot of fringe groups that would like to use the growing popular resistance to this war to bring their messages to a broader audience. No doubt, if this war goes forward, a lot of people will be radicalized.

[DeltaElite]

I was proud to participate. :D ;)

[El Tejon]

Malone, well, these "fringe" groups are not fringe to the "peace"/pro-terrorist movement. They don't hate war, they just hate America. See, e.g. the FARC speaker.

If this war goes forward, America will be safer and its enemies defeated. This upsets them.

[beemerb]

A book Called "Game Of The Foxs" should be read by all.The anti war movement of the 30's where funded by German intellengence units. This looks like it could be the sponsered by the middle east .
I wonder how many Americans need to be killed before we do something about it.When a country pays bombers and lets them use there country for training areas something needs to be done.
They have allready proven that they can not be trusted after the last war. Inspectors not given ability to go where they wanted to go to look for weapons of mass distruction.They have allready proven they are willing to use gas on its own people when they used it on the Kurds.
How can they be trusted?????????????????
Bob

[Malone LaVeigh]

El Tejon:

If you have some worthwhile you're trying to say to me, using terms like '"peace"/pro-terrorist movement' isn't the way to do it. I'll wait for a coherent statement before attempting a reply.

[Zander]

All being a "sponsor" means is they put up some money to have a table at the rally site. -- MVAnd coordinated the events; which means, of course, that they arranged speakers [along with their security and transportation], secured the necessary permits, printed the signs/leaflets, and funded endless other details with donations from the most radical anti-American groups imaginable.

Just review the list of sponsors and tell me what half...no, a quarter...have to do with protesting the war in which we have been engaged since September 11th.

[madmike]

Let's be real: Hussein is no threat to the US. Zero. Nada. He's nothing.

The risk is that he'll destabilize the region. But he hasn't done so yet, and the local forces can handle him as long as we keep his launchers and aircraft down.

As to the "No blood for oil!" protestors, I'll bet most of them drove there in SUVs:rolleyes:

Also, the best estimate for forces if we wind up in ground combat in Baghdad involves up to 19 divisions of troops in various parts of the world...guess how many we have? If you said "far less than 19," you win the no-brainer prize.

Now, North Korea DOES have nukes, missiles, and a lunatic...

BTW, Secretary Rumsfeld: The US CANNOT fight a three-front war. What the @#$% are you smoking?

[ravinraven]

Remember back when Slickster used to have zipper problems and he'd blow up a few camels and sand dunes to deflect attention?? The "peace" crowd were not in sight then. Hmmmm. Maybe peace isn't their real interest. And what about those thoughtful folks who are going over and lay around Baghdad to use themselves as human shields for their terrorist friends. We might not even go to war. Then their travel money would be wasted. Why don't they go to Isreal and shield some of the buses and coffee houses from homicide bombers?

BUSH is an acronym It means Beat Up Saddam Hussein!

Ain't I clever as all get out.

But I really do miss old Slickster. Everytime his zipper warmed up and he started slinging missiles, we had a minor economic boom up here where I live. Why the H. was that, you might ask. There's a Corning Glass plant right about in the middle of the county. It makes all the nose cones for all the missiles we fire. The sequence of events was: 1] new zipper story. 2] blast a few camels. 3] replace the spent missiles. 4] missile builders order nose cones. 5] workers get over time and a few new ones are hired to make the replacement nose cones. 6] happy hour is really happy again. And we loved him so much that we voted old Hitlary in as our Senator. Aren't we a great bunch or what?

[jmbg29]

Aren't we a great bunch or what? :evil: :D :evil:

[Wildalaska]

All of those groups listed before are only relevant to a few newspapers, Hollywood Stars, and Euro trash psuedointellectual leftists.

They add no meaning to the debate on going to war with Iraq, which BTW, I am personally against at this time, because their ideas are bankrupt.

I can decide to support or not support a war without them, thank you.

WildtrynottohurlslogansAlaska

[Khornet]

your post says it all about how the 'news' industry works. Good perspective.

[Khornet]

Dozens of leftist groups sponsor antiwar demonstrations and that says nothing about the character of the antiwar movement. But Bush has friends in the oil industry and that tells us all we need to know about his motives. All clear now!

[El Tejon]

Malone, you would prefer "pro-terrorist/peace" movement?

All I'm pointing out is that these people do not want "peace." Never have, never will. They want the enemies of America to win.

[NewShooter78]

Well I don't think everyone that's for peace, even those demonstrators, are pro-terrorist. I will not support Bush, right now, in wanting to attack Iraq. It is bull**** posturing, and its going to get a lot of our soldiers killed for nothing. And just because people weren't out demonstrating, doesnt' mean that all 289 million of us support these actions. We just don't like being identified with such leftists, and we have better things to do than to go hang out looking for a little air time.

[El Tejon]

NewShooter, they are not "for peace." They have never been for peace. They have only been for the enemies of America. Vietnam, CCCP, The Saviour, and now Iraq.

[Khornet]

It was a very funny article which poked well-deserved fun at the fact that, as always, the media present us a picture of the world filtered through their own prejudices, for better or worse. I wish I had written it!

[Chris Rhines]

Kirk -

You're talking out your aft portal.

There are a hell of alot of people out there who have well-reasoned, well-researched objections to a US invasion of Iraq. They sure as hell don't deserve to be called 'pro-terrorist.'

- Chris

[Khornet]

www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment-flynn012003.asp

[BigG]

The self loathing/lack of insight of the "peace" (anti America) activists is fascinating. Do they not realize that their heads will adorn pikes right next to ours should the side they are backing win?

Better think again what you wish for, protestors. You might get it! :rolleyes:

[ReadyontheRight]

http://www.scrappleface.com/MT/archives/000599.html

"Protestor Takes to Street in Baghdad
(2003-01-18) -- A protestor took to the street in Baghdad today, chanting slogans against the policies of the Hussein administration.

Unfortunately, he had to cut short his protest when he learned that his house had burned to the ground in a matter of seconds, killing his entire family.

On his way home, he was accidentally killed when his car ran into a hail of gunfire."

Humerous but true. He and his family were more likely tortured. Iraq SHOULD BE one of the richest nations in the world. Instead they have this:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/2533897.stm

We need stability in the Middle East and the USA and UK we seem to be the only contries interested in enforcing the terms of surrender in the Gulf War. Military action should be the last resort, but it needs to be a resort.

Many of the so-called "Peace" protesters (and I'm not lumping in THR members with their well-reasoned reasons and solutions to avoid war) showed their true stripes by remaining silent to actions by Clinton in the 90s. These folks are not anti-war. They are anti-conservative and somehow embarrased about America.

[El Tejon]

Chris, good one. Like the Naval reference!

I do not dispute that there may be well-reasoned argument against involvement with Iraq, including the "what happens after" argument that I think would be most moving, especially to this taxpayer (I had a really bad Jan. 15th). However, at the protest rallies, what we saw on parade was the "Hate America" crowd which has been around since Vietnam. They do not want peace; they want America defeated.

The demonstators, well, that I saw, including the FARC spokesperson (Chris, come on, FARC) were all "pro-terrorist."

[Khornet]

When the annual Right to Life march takes place. Usually a BIG number of marchers. Let's take note of the coverage and the number estimates.

[Khornet]

this is not to draw the abortion debate into this. It's just to note the differential coverage and reports of crowd sizes depending on the political cause.

[grampster]

Go to www.hillsdale.edu. Scroll down and click on January Imprimis; American Unilateralism by Dr. Charles Krauthammer.
This article by this erudite, thoughtful man says it all!

[Rangerover]

However, at the protest rallies, what we saw on parade was the "Hate America" crowd which has been around since Vietnam. They do not want peace; they want America defeated.
El Tejon is correct.

I might respect anti-war protesters a LITTLE if more of them appeared to be civilized Americans who were genuinely concerned about the well-being of their country. However, what I see all to often is an inordinate number of enraged, purple-haired dope fiends waving communist flags. I tend to smile when I see this lot, always thinking that if they had been born in some other nations and tried this that they would probably wind up with their pants around their ankles in "Achmed's Gulag". However, in the USA they can pray for their own demise in security and comfort. Ironic, eh? I also have little doubt that if Bill Clinton was in charge of our conflict with Iraq that they would not be on the street, but rather back at the dorm at "Blissninnie U." sniffing more glue and watching reruns of "The Real World".

That said, I think the war with Iraq (and whoever follows) is a question of, "Now or later". I'd just as soon get it over with now before Hussein can obtain a nuke from North Korea or build his own and take out half of the 3rd Mech.

A lot of folks refuse to admit that we live in a treacherous and dangerous world (as it always has been and always will be). I could be wrong, but I think these are the same kinds of people who wind up getting killed at railroad crossings every year: they don't see the danger before it's too late.

You'd think that nearly 3000 murdered Americans would wake them up. Nope. This monumental human propensity for self-delusion never fails to facinate me. But that's just me. When the mullahs manage to detonate a nuke in N.Y. harbor, it probably won't mean any more than 09-11-01. "Hey, it's just one city!" "Why are we invading _________?!"

You'd have to place a small thermonuclear device or a vial of smallpox squarely in their shorts to get their attention. "Gee dear, what are these funny spots all over me?! I can't go to the demonstration looking like THIS!!"

I'm not so worried about what OUR government is going to do to me. I'm worried about what OTHER "governments" are planning to do to me.

Am I paranoid about the Middle East? Perhaps. But I also have a funny feeling that if some of us got the same C.I.A. briefing every day that George Bush gets that we'd be reticent to leave our houses...

[fallingblock]

That is a good piece.
Rangerover says it well; some folks just won't believe the way the world works...they believe if they 'pray for peace' long and hard enough, it will happen. I don't think any war is a 'good' idea, but there are times when war is a better option than 'unilateral peace'. Is this one of those times?:confused:

[Leatherneck]

I think there are a lot of us who remain unconvinced by the case the Administration has made so far. We are not pacifists :D and we're not anti-American and we sure as hell are not pro-Saddam. But two things weigh heavy on my mind at this point:
1. The cost to our soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines;
2. The aftermath, no matter how conditions inside Iraq turn out. We'll buy a future of anti-American hatred that we can only imagine now.

Having said that, if the President says "Go", then I, and all my family members in the military, will salute and get it on.

FWIW, I think it's critical RIGHT NOW for the President to lay his cards on the table--even if it burns some HUMINT sources in the process--and make the case against Saddam in no uncertain terms. Right. Now.

TC
TFL Survivor

[ReadyontheRight]

2. The aftermath, no matter how conditions inside Iraq turn out. We'll buy a future of anti-American hatred that we can only imagine now.

Three points:

1. It seems to me that 9/11 and many of the attacks on US interests are the result of CONTEMPT for American half-measures like sending in cruise missles to make it seem as if we're doing something.

2. It's not America's fault that Osama Bin Laden and his followers flipped a gasket because Americans were in Saudi Arabia for Desert Storm. OBL is an idle rich boy out trying to prove his worth after doing nothing in his miserable life. he would have just found another excuse to become a terrorist.

3. Does an armed victim buy a future of hatred from the criminal and his family when he defends himself? Perhaps, but the armed victim is still right.

[ReadyontheRight]

FWIW, I think it's critical RIGHT NOW for the President to lay his cards on the table--even if it burns some HUMINT sources in the process--and make the case against Saddam in no uncertain terms. Right. Now.

Agreed. Hopefully burn but don't kill the sources.

[Sean Smith]

About cards on the table...

I have a sneaking suspicion about what is going to happen, based on a combination of historical precedent, wild speculation, and what we know about George W. Bush.

There is a whole cottage industry of underestimating George W. Bush. Which is interesting, since he has had a consistent habit of beating the snot out of his enemies... see Ann Richards, Al Gore, the entire Democratic party, and the Taliban for details. Yet the perception persists that he is a dummy and a lightweight.

That's brilliant. Make your foes underestimate you, then sucker-punch them and come out on top. That's what Bush has done for years on end. His success isn't accidental. It looks accidental because he wants it to. It is obvious that the Bush administration has made little effort to justify its hard-line policy against Iraq, beyond a few platitudes about terrorism and weapons of mass destruction. This seems dumb, since he needs public support for a war. Yet is is obviously moving to war and not trying to drum up popular support. The obvious question is... WHY?

By intentionally failing to justify his hard-line policy towards Iraq, Bush has accomplished several things:

1. He has discovered who really backs him and who is just a fair-weather friend (or outright foe), both on the local political scene and abroad.
2. He has created a great deal of doubt and uncertainty about if or when any military action might take place at all. Grudging support of UN inspection efforts only reinforces this.
3. Because of #2, he can move vast military forces into the region, yet still have their eventual use (let alone the timing) seem highly doubtful.
4. Least important, by not divulging clear and convincing evidence of Iraqi wrongdoing, he has protected the sources of that information.

Thus, by not informing the public at large of his specific evidence supporting a hard-line Iraqi policy, he has made several positive accomplishments.

In that light, consider the following scenario...

Seemingly out of the blue, war with Iraq is initiated on a massive scale. Everyone whines about what a warmongering despot Bush is... for a few hours. Then, taking a page out of JFK's playbook, Bush gives the UN a huge "information dump" that removes all doubt as to the justifications for war with Iraq. His political opponents at home and abroad are humiliated and discredited, and the timing of the invasion of Iraq is a complete surprise.

Sound nutty? It might be. Certainly, our resident pinkos will say it is impossible, because Bush is a dummy. Then again, their bottoms are still sore from being beaten by... George W.! Which might tell you something. And as a side note, Powell has actually hinted that such a massive information dump will be taking place in the near future, which may more may not mean anything at all.

[fallingblock]

The realization of your scenario might be more than we could hope for...but I'd be pleased if it played out that way:D

[BigG]

Sean, I have the utmost respect for President Bush and hope that you have nailed it dead to rights. :D

[Leatherneck]

Sean:
Very insightful message. Let's hope you're right.

FWIW, I've never thought he was a dummy of any sort. He may share his father's unfortunate poor oratory skills, but his accomplishments are not those of a dummy.

TC
TFL Survivor

[Sean Smith]

Check this out... I may not be as nutty as I thought. :evil:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,881215,00.html

The "Adlai Stevenson moment" has become Washington shorthand for the US presentation of its intelligence case. Stevenson was the US ambassador to the UN at the time of the 1962 Cuban missile crisis, who dramatically confronted the Soviet envoy with vivid aerial photographs of nuclear missiles being unloaded in Cuba.

[Sean Smith]

By the way, an interesting diplomatic side-note: remember that recent French & German announcement that they were totally opposed to war? The context of that statment was interesting. They invited Colin Powell to a meeting that was claimed to be just about terrorism in general. Then, they blindsided him with the announcement to punk him out after his months of good-faith attempts to negotiate their cooperation over Iraq.

You will notice that, by coincidence ;) , Powell has changed his position to, in effect, "You can get stuffed."

[Sean Smith]

Another nutty prediction: war and U.S. occupation of Iraq will reveal that the French, Germans and Russians (the big opponents of war) violated U.N. sanctions against Iraq on a massive scale, and in ways that supported Iraqi weapons programs. This, combined with their quasi-legitimate financial interests in Iraq, are their true motives for opposing war.

:D

[BigG]

:eek: Why Sean, I'm shocked. Just shocked! :eek: ;)

[Sean Smith]

Yeah, I was getting kind of crazy there. Sorry. Hugs for everyone!

:evil: