[Richard Poe]

<< But if the man runs a site called Antiwar.com, can't he remain true to his site's aims as advertised? >>

Dear Unadorned:

It's good to see you on FreeRepublic!

To answer your question, Raimondo's antiwar stance -- like most antiwar stances -- appears to be fundamentally dishonest.

With the exception of Quakers, Amishmen and other religiously-motivated pacifists, most people who claim to be "antiwar" are simply using opposition to "war" as a mask for some other agenda.

This is certainly true of Raimondo, who does not even claim to oppose war in principle. Raimondo poses as a supporter of the American Revolution and the Founding Fathers -- a position which is incompatible with a pacifist philosophy.

The purpose of my recent blog entry is to raise the question of Raimondo's true motives and agenda, which I would contend are not at all clearly or honestly "advertised" on his Web site.

[avenir]

"Raimondo poses as a supporter of the American Revolution and the Founding Fathers -- a position which is incompatible with a pacifist philosophy."

So true. I imagine that a miraculous, face-to-face and sudden meeting with the Founding Fathers would strike terror in any number of moderns who bend and twist and distort their thoughts beyond comprehension. The snakes would scurry off to find the nearest rock to hide under.

[palmer]

With the exception of Quakers, Amishmen and other religiously-motivated pacifists, most people who claim to be "antiwar" are simply using opposition to "war" as a mask for some other agenda.

My agenda is using taxpayer money wisely.

[BlackElk]

Like Justine, Ho Chi Minh also claimed to admire the Founding Fathers and the Declaration of Independence.