HOW THE ANTI-WAR MOVEMENT IS BLOWING IT

Infoshop news - "anarchist, activist, and alternative news" ^ | October 24, 2003 | Bill Weinberg

[tgslTakoma]

The barnyard animals are fighting amongst themselves because (after two-plus years of us conservatives beating the "Becker/ANSWER is a commie/front" drum) mainstream America is finally learning the truth and staying away from anything to do with cANSWER.

It is only a matter of hours before we find out here in DC how well (or hopefully, poorly) attended their "peace" march is.

In any event, keep an eye on CNN, of all places, for reports on our conter events. But be forewarned - we never have the "thousands" of supporters that cANSWER has - because we barely have enough money to rent a stage and potties, let alone to charter buses and ship people into our rallies. What we lack in number, we more than make up for in spirit and love of God and country.

Wish us luck!

[Billthedrill]

Hard-headed analysis with which I agree nearly point-for-point with the exception of an uncharacteristically uncritical acceptance of a bogus London Times story. And it will be ignored. The antiwar movement is not a place for hard-headed analysis.

Despite a personal history of outrageous abuse at the hands of these sanctimonious - the word is appropriate - darlings, I have to confess a drop of dark sympathy along with my schadenfreude. They have a pretty weak hand this time around. Their best bet is to loudly proclaim that there's no proof that Saddam was involved with a particular single atrocity and hope their hardest that nobody brings up the ones he most certainly was responsible for. It's a losing hand.

[Robert A Cook PE]

The guy makes sense!

(Darn it........... It's much easier tofight fools than realists!)

--- Hey Ragtime: This time I get to ping you first!

[fire_eye]

...we never have the "thousands" of supporters that cANSWER has

no, you have the millions that don't bother going into the streets to protest because they have jobs, and lives, and consider it undignified.

I'm enjoying watching the peace pukes implode. They just knew they'd found a new "casus belli" (pun intended) when we were getting ready to invade Iraq, after the long dry spell for peace protests since Vietnam. Unfortunately for them, this isn't the 1960's, Iraq isn't Vietnam, George Bush isn't JFK or Lyndon Johnson, we're unarguably not the aggressor in the war on terrorism... etc. etc. - they're just an empty vessel making a lot of noise, and nobody but their fellow leftie-progressives even *care* what they think. They're making idiots of themselves and the media are making similar idiots of their similar selves in ballyhooing it all - and I hope they keep it up; they're going to spend themselves utterly in chasing windmills. This guy's article is a good illustration of their incipient bankruptcy.

[MJY1288]

I think the story about who is actually behind this group ANSWER is one of the least reported stories on the Pro's and Con's of the Iraq War.

Has ANSWER announced who they will support for President in 04?

I believe the reason why we don't see more people counter protesting these leftist anti-american jackels from ANSWER, is because supporting our troops, America and the War in Iraq doesn't require a radical ideoligy, supporting the spread of democracy and liberty is second nature to 99% of Americans and therefore the need to take to the streets isn't a priority in our day to day lives. Unlike these America hating leftist who are driven by hate

[sauropod]

Hey Mr. Weinberg! UFPJ also has links to communists!

[sauropod]

Leslie Cagan has links to Castro.

[whereasandsoforth]

Their "anti-war movement" has another unmentioned problem. It is souless. At least the peace & love crowd from the 1960's were real in their beliefs. This crowd, or at least the organization at the top, does not oppose war per se. They oppose the USA and guise it as anti-war. This lack of honesty makes their cause unreal and unappealing to anyone with half a brain who actually might have peace & love as their main concern.

[scouse]

ON FoxNews this morning I was reading the news items scrolling across the bottom of the screen and LO and Behold there it was: "Republican Free Republic expects one thousand counter demonstrators today, in DC".

[Snerfling]

They oppose the USA Bush

If Clinton were Pres, there would be no opposition from any quarter.

[whereasandsoforth]

Sorry. My mistake. Thanks!

[marktwain]

The "shock and awe" bombardment of Baghdad was to have dwarfed the massive aerial bombardment of 1991's Operation Desert Storm, with Pentagon officials actually calling it a "21st Century Blitzkrieg." In the actual fact, far fewer missiles fell on Baghdad in 2003 than in 1991.

What nonsense. From the very begining, the "shock and awe" bombardment was always conceived of as using far less ordinance, far more precisely than in Desert Storm. The purpose was to hit military targets without hitting civilians, which is exactly what happened.

Do exactly what you say you are going to do, and these fools claim that their immoral protests to support a totalitarian regime are what made you do it!

[metesky]

Give 'em hell today!

[TomB]

The Feb. 15 mobilizaiton probably saved countless Iraqi lives. And--if we could build on the progress intelligently--it would put us in a stronger position to oppose the current occupation.

OK. Think for a moment about the cognitive dissonance that was necessary to utter that statement. Here we have a group that was OPPOSED to the overthrow of Hussein, someone who was responsible for the deaths of thousands of Iraqis a month, boasting that they may have saved a few hundred lives by "altering" the bombing campaign.

Despite the soul-searching in this screed, one wonders if these people are capable of ANY logical thinking at all.

[maica]

NO, they are not, because if they start to think, they start to doubt their 'core beliefs.'

[norton]

"At least the peace & love crowd from the 1960's were real in their beliefs."

I'm just guessing that you were not around, or draft aged, in the sixties. "Real in their beliefs" meant scared into poopies about being drafted or firmly intending to get an edge on their 'oppressive' opposite gender or 'oppressive' other races, or 'oppressive' meat eaters, etc.

Oh yeah, and the cheap drugs, can't forget the wonderous insights provided by modern chemestry and horticulture.

Real beliefs, yes, principled or otherwise, no.

[WOSG]

#1 way the anti-war movement is blowing it:

BY BEING WRONG.

[Valin]

moral consistency,

Stop it man, you're killin me!

Just before the start of Gulf war II Dennis Prager read some letters written by some grade school children from a Quaker school about the up coming war. The letters were making the same arguments as the "adults" leading the anti-war movement, all of a sudden I realized that these folks were morally stunted, there moral develoment stopped at about age 9.

[T Lady]

PING!

-Regards, T.