Anti-war movement a caricature of itself
 

Well...Saddam went for 1 whole meal, so I guess a day is a major protest.

Cindy must be soooooo hungry by now

Re: Anti-war movement a caricature of itself
 

[ QUOTE ]
Well...Saddam went for 1 whole meal, so I guess a day is a major protest.

Cindy must be soooooo hungry by now

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, that's kind of embarassing, but they could be more ridiculous - they could be pro-war.

Re: Anti-war movement a caricature of itself
 

I'm just curious. What method could someone take to oppose the war that you wouldn't belittle them for?

Re: Anti-war movement a caricature of itself
 

Cindy Sheehan is an attention whore.

Regardless of your posisition on the war you must be able to recognize this.

Re: Anti-war movement a caricature of itself
 

Well publicized voluntary service in non-military capacities (ala Vets hospitals, Peace Corp, missions etc, other government service, ) would be one method that is consistent with their purported beliefs but contributes to the national good.

Peaceful rallies that protest the war without politicizing the issues and without infringing on the rights of others would be at the oppposite end of the spectrum. Im sure there are lots of things in between.

Re: Anti-war movement a caricature of itself
 

Any public demonstration made in the name of non-violence is ok by me.

Re: Anti-war movement a caricature of itself
 

[ QUOTE ]
Any public demonstration made in the name of non-violence is ok by me.

[/ QUOTE ]

From what I gather most of these anti-war demonstrations are either well infiltrated or outright staged by the most evil statists (Stalinists, Socialists, etc)

Re: Anti-war movement a caricature of itself
 

Socialism is inherently violent and deplorable. However, since these people aren't standing around talking about how we should be redistributing wealth to egalitarian standards, I don't have a problem; as far as I can see, they're just advocating a peaceful withdrawal from our foreign victims, and that's good.

Re: Anti-war movement a caricature of itself
 

Evidence of Stalinist infiltration or staging?

Re: Anti-war movement a caricature of itself
 

[ QUOTE ]
Evidence of Stalinist infiltration or staging?

[/ QUOTE ]


hes just trolling as usual

Re: Anti-war movement a caricature of itself
 

[ QUOTE ]
Evidence of Stalinist infiltration or staging?

[/ QUOTE ]

Several rallies were staged by the World Worker's Party, a major communist party in the United States Linky Check them out at Workers.org.

ANSWER also staged several major anti-war rallies. ANSWER of course is a front for the WWP.

[ QUOTE ]
Do you want to know why the antiwar movement has virtually no political power, despite polls showing that a majority of Americans believe it was a mistake for the United States to invade Iraq?
...
Do you want to know why no major national Democratic office holder — not Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.), not Sen. Harry Reid (Nev.), not Rep. Nancy Pelosi (Calif.), not Sen. John Kerry (Mass.), not Sen. Joseph Biden (Del.), not anyone — showed up at any of the antiwar events here in Washington this week?
...
Organized by the left-wing coalition United for Peace and Justice and the neo-communist group International ANSWER (Act Now to Stop War and End Racism), the rally featured well-known speakers such as Sheehan, Jesse Jackson and the pro-Saddam British MP, George Galloway.
...
And besides the well-known names, there were representatives of far-left groups such as the Socialist Front of Puerto Rico, the Nicaragua Network, the Network in Solidarity With the People of the Philippines, the Women’s Anti-Imperialist League and the Global Women’s Strike .

link


[/ QUOTE ]

Like I said, these organizations are the most evil of statist organizations in the world.

[ QUOTE ]
Most controversially of all, however, is the fact that WWP has defended Slobodan Milošević and Saddam Hussein against attacks from both the right and the left. Notably, former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark, founder of the International Action Center, is in Iraq as of December 2005 acting as a consult to Hussein's defense team. Clark also spoke sympathetically of Milošević at his funeral in March 2006, telling the crowd, "History will prove that Slobodan Milošević was right."



[/ QUOTE ]

MoveOn.org co-sponsored several major rallies with ANSWER, but had this to say:

[ QUOTE ]
In its e-mail endorsing the antiwar rally held in Washington, D.C. over the weekend, Moveon.org took the unusual step of notifying its 3.5 million members that though it wanted people to attend the event, it had “disagreements on a range of issues” with the organizers. (referring to ANSWER)

[/ QUOTE ]

And no, HMK, there is nothing anti-violent about communist revolutions. I thought you said you read the forum over at infoshop.

Particularly, members of the Black Bloc (infoshop.org/blackblo.html

http://www.sfgate.com/chronicle/pict...ba_march23.jpg

The San Fran rally:
http://www.zombietime.com/global_day...6/IMG_5680.JPG

Notice Che on his shirt:
http://www.intellectualconservative....iwar-rally.jpg

Yeah, non-violence alright.
http://images2.fotki.com/v21/photos/...fficers-vi.jpg


Another Link: Anti-War Crowd Backs Notorious Communist Dictators

Re: Anti-war movement a caricature of itself
 

[ QUOTE ]
the Women’s Anti-Imperialist League

[/ QUOTE ]

My, they sound evil. Imagine not only opposing imperialism, but being a woman to boot!

Radical leftist groups always jump on the back of (and often ruin) these kinds of things. The vast majority of people involved have no interest in them whatsoever.

Re: Anti-war movement a caricature of itself
 

Those groups are prominant because their members are activists and their perspectives predispose them to be anti-war and 'anti-establishment' by default. I'm sure there are plenty of neo-Nazis and Klansmen who are pro war. It doesn't have anything to do with the issue of whether war is justified or not.

And as for:
[ QUOTE ]
Yeah, non-violence alright.

[/ QUOTE ]
The poster was actually responding to the OP and the fasting protest it refered to, rather than poisoning the well by drawing somewhat tenuous links to undesirable groups.

Re: Anti-war movement a caricature of itself
 

[ QUOTE ]
Radical leftist groups always jump on the back of (and often ruin) these kinds of things.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, this was exactly my point, and in addition to "jumping on the back" these Stalinist or Socialist groups will often stage the events themselves (I suspect as largely a recruitment effort)

Re: Anti-war movement a caricature of itself
 

you're an idiot copernicus, if you keep electing stupid republicans you will get your just desserts eventually

Re: Anti-war movement a caricature of itself
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'm just curious. What method could someone take to oppose the war that you wouldn't belittle them for?

[/ QUOTE ]

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y28...lent/cyrus.jpg

Re: Anti-war movement a caricature of itself
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm just curious. What method could someone take to oppose the war that you wouldn't belittle them for?

[/ QUOTE ]

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y28...lent/cyrus.jpg

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] Seriously though............would you really appreciate someone lighting themselves on fire in the street in front of your house for your children to see [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

Re: Anti-war movement a caricature of itself
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'm just curious. What method could someone take to oppose the war that you wouldn't belittle them for?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'll second that question.


q/q

Re: Anti-war movement a caricature of itself
 

Riddick, anyone even passingly familiar with ANY recent antiwar demonstrations can see the dishonesty of what you're posting.

Seriously: it's one thing to simply be aggressively misinformed (as you and your cohorts on the far right almost always are). But it's quite another thing to actually take the time to sift through a picture and then simply cherry-pick sections that you think you can use to paint a dishonest and unrepresentative picture of a group as a whole.

Men of character and integrity do not conduct themselves dishonestly when trying to present their evidence. You should take that lesson and reflect on it, deeply.

For starters:

"International ANSWER" represents, at the most, a very small fraction of the antiwar movement, and more than likely they are getting significant right-wing support to build their media profile in order to discredit the left as a whole. (That's how things work in the real world. And you're part of that effort, whether you realize it or not.)

Secondly:

The "Anarchist Blac Bloc" is almost entirely an internet and media fiction, stemming from hyperbolic scare-stories used to drum up public opposition to the 1999 WTO demonstrations. For all practical purposes, this "evil anarchist group" simply does not exist, let alone pose a "threat" to anyone. Yes, there are anarchist websites on the internet. But the "black-clad anarchists" nonsense you are regurgitating here is a whole different animal -- and if you'd done the "research" you want us to think you have, you would already know that.

As to the rest:

The other "evil communist infiltrators" you've mentioned are so ridiculously insignificant that only a right-wing idiot would consider them as anything but a bunch of hangers-on trying to gain publicity (specifically: they are trying to gain publicity by latching onto antiwar events and then hoping the right-wing press will give them free airtime because they can be used to scare their right-wing viewers and discredit the demonstrators -- gee, what else is new).

In sum:

It's like claiming that rock concerts are evil because you saw a guy in a "devil" shirt attending one. Of course, you probably believe that too -- and I'm sure you have a whole laundry list of cherry-picked images and religious websites you can refer me to which will "show me the light" about the "demonic infiltration of rock'n'roll". And I'm sure the same blue-haired grandmothers that eat up your Fox News BS will applaud you and send you checks for that, too. A whole nation of suckers and sheep, feeding off each other's paranoia and delusions.


q/q

Re: Anti-war movement a caricature of itself
 

so a few leftists happen to be communists and that discredits the whole party in the eyes of the Right..

what does that say about all the racists and rednecks and anti-semitic bigots and defected Dixiecrats that vote Republican? [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

anti-war protests will galvanize the base into helping take back the house in 2006 - hence the Right Wing's fear of them - but Republicans are scared of everything these days - the judicary, liberals, Black Christians, and anything that doesn't look like Ozzie and Harriet.

Then we gotta fix all they [censored] up during the 10 yr tenure - man - whadda mess for the next Democratic administration.

RB

Re: Anti-war movement a caricature of itself
 

[ QUOTE ]
Riddick, anyone even passingly familiar with ANY recent antiwar demonstrations can see the dishonesty of what you're posting.

Seriously: it's one thing to simply be aggressively misinformed (as you and your cohorts on the far right almost always are). But it's quite another thing to actually take the time to sift through a picture and then simply cherry-pick sections that you think you can use to paint a dishonest and unrepresentative picture of a group as a whole.

Men of character and integrity do not conduct themselves dishonestly when trying to present their evidence. You should take that lesson and reflect on it, deeply.

For starters:

"International ANSWER" represents, at the most, a very small fraction of the antiwar movement, and more than likely they are getting significant right-wing support to build their media profile in order to discredit the left as a whole. (That's how things work in the real world. And you're part of that effort, whether you realize it or not.)

Secondly:

The "Anarchist Blac Bloc" is almost entirely an internet and media fiction, stemming from hyperbolic scare-stories used to drum up public opposition to the 1999 WTO demonstrations. For all practical purposes, this "evil anarchist group" simply does not exist, let alone pose a "threat" to anyone. Yes, there are anarchist websites on the internet. But the "black-clad anarchists" nonsense you are regurgitating here is a whole different animal -- and if you'd done the "research" you want us to think you have, you would already know that.

As to the rest:

The other "evil communist infiltrators" you've mentioned are so ridiculously insignificant that only a right-wing idiot would consider them as anything but a bunch of hangers-on trying to gain publicity (specifically: they are trying to gain publicity by latching onto antiwar events and then hoping the right-wing press will give them free airtime because they can be used to scare their right-wing viewers and discredit the demonstrators -- gee, what else is new).

In sum:

It's like claiming that rock concerts are evil because you saw a guy in a "devil" shirt attending one. Of course, you probably believe that too -- and I'm sure you have a whole laundry list of cherry-picked images and religious websites you can refer me to which will "show me the light" about the "demonic infiltration of rock'n'roll". And I'm sure the same blue-haired grandmothers that eat up your Fox News BS will applaud you and send you checks for that, too. A whole nation of suckers and sheep, feeding off each other's paranoia and delusions.


q/q

[/ QUOTE ]

Wait a minute. ANSWER organizes many anti-war rallies yet you characterize them as a very small fraction of the anti-war movement. Perhaps it is you who are being disingenuous for although true they represent a small fraction of those who oppose the war, they seem to be quite representative of those who fervently oppose the war, after all they are ORGANIZING the rallies Quads.

Re: Anti-war movement a caricature of itself
 

Lots of groups "organize" and "sponsor" and "cosponsor". The left is an alphabet soup of groups that do this, and has been for decades.

Now, who actually REPRESENTS the majority of people against the war? If you think ANSWER does, you're f'in nuts. Most people against the war are just average Americans who feel completely powerless in the face of it all and who have no clue how to voice their opinions in any way that will make a meaningful difference.

The role of the screaming pro-war minority is simply to make sure that things stay that way -- no matter how many lies they have to tell to keep us there.


q/q

Re: Anti-war movement a caricature of itself
 

One additional thing that Riddick failed to mention, too:

If you ever actually TALK to the few idiots who show up at "leftist" rallies waving communist flags and the like, you'll figure out REALLY fast that they're not communists at all. They're usually young Republicans and/or Libertarian Party members who are trying to get those BS flags and banners into news photos of the rally so that they can later accuse their opponents of harboring those same sentiments. This is common knowledge at any progressive/left rally I've ever been to. But the right-wing propaganda machine laps it up, just as intended. A few of them don't really know the difference, but the fact is that most of them -- like Riddick -- simply don't care. They just want a scary image to attack somebody with, and they're too intellectually lazy to read the fine print or (God forbid) get on the ground to understand what's really going on.

As I said before, this is the way things work in the real world. People tell lies to get those lies on camera. People monkeywrench their opponents' events. People lie, people cheat, people take false credit, people engage in publicity stunts, people wait for "somebody else" to get the permit, people wait for "somebody else" to paint them a sign.

And most people are simply stuck in the middle of this mess, just wanting their kids to come home in one piece, and hoping to God that somehow their voices will be heard in an environment where everyone is talking from a script and nobody's listening to a word they say.

q/q

Re: Anti-war movement a caricature of itself
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Riddick, anyone even passingly familiar with ANY recent antiwar demonstrations can see the dishonesty of what you're posting.

Seriously: it's one thing to simply be aggressively misinformed (as you and your cohorts on the far right almost always are). But it's quite another thing to actually take the time to sift through a picture and then simply cherry-pick sections that you think you can use to paint a dishonest and unrepresentative picture of a group as a whole.

Men of character and integrity do not conduct themselves dishonestly when trying to present their evidence. You should take that lesson and reflect on it, deeply.

For starters:

"International ANSWER" represents, at the most, a very small fraction of the antiwar movement, and more than likely they are getting significant right-wing support to build their media profile in order to discredit the left as a whole. (That's how things work in the real world. And you're part of that effort, whether you realize it or not.)

Secondly:

The "Anarchist Blac Bloc" is almost entirely an internet and media fiction, stemming from hyperbolic scare-stories used to drum up public opposition to the 1999 WTO demonstrations. For all practical purposes, this "evil anarchist group" simply does not exist, let alone pose a "threat" to anyone. Yes, there are anarchist websites on the internet. But the "black-clad anarchists" nonsense you are regurgitating here is a whole different animal -- and if you'd done the "research" you want us to think you have, you would already know that.

As to the rest:

The other "evil communist infiltrators" you've mentioned are so ridiculously insignificant that only a right-wing idiot would consider them as anything but a bunch of hangers-on trying to gain publicity (specifically: they are trying to gain publicity by latching onto antiwar events and then hoping the right-wing press will give them free airtime because they can be used to scare their right-wing viewers and discredit the demonstrators -- gee, what else is new).

In sum:

It's like claiming that rock concerts are evil because you saw a guy in a "devil" shirt attending one. Of course, you probably believe that too -- and I'm sure you have a whole laundry list of cherry-picked images and religious websites you can refer me to which will "show me the light" about the "demonic infiltration of rock'n'roll". And I'm sure the same blue-haired grandmothers that eat up your Fox News BS will applaud you and send you checks for that, too. A whole nation of suckers and sheep, feeding off each other's paranoia and delusions.


q/q

[/ QUOTE ]

Wait a minute. ANSWER organizes many anti-war rallies yet you characterize them as a very small fraction of the anti-war movement. Perhaps it is you who are being disingenuous for although true they represent a small fraction of those who oppose the war, they seem to be quite representative of those who fervently oppose the war, after all they are ORGANIZING the rallies Quads.

[/ QUOTE ]

The Socialist Workers Party is a prominent organiser of anti-war demos in the UK. The war is massively unpopular here and the main anti-war demo was one of the biggest demonstrations in living memory in the UK. And yet, the SWP remains a completely insignificant party in terms of popularity in the UK, limited almost entirely to students. It isn't at all representative of the anti-war movement. Its interests simply coincide with the anti-war movement on that issue and it already has the organisational structures in place to organise protests.

Re: Anti-war movement a caricature of itself
 

I think its fairly obvious that Q/Q is being disingenuous here, as several posters have already pointed out, but to further clarify, I never said that there was anything inherently wrong with anti-war rallies or most of the people attending them. I simply stated that they were often well-infiltrated or outright staged by the seriously [censored] up stalinist groups. Andyfox then asked for evidence of this, and I posted quite crystal clear evidence. I could care less about either "side" of this war issue, it really doesn't concern me in the least bit, so I'm stating what I know to be facts, and fairly objectively. (Yes, its objective to refer to Stalinist groups as evil)

But don't take my word for it, if you believe Q/Q that I'm being dishonest here. Read this Democratic Underground thread, entitled THE ANSWER PROBLEM, located here. Surely these posters (OP and many replies) are in the know.

And I quote:

[ QUOTE ]
I went to the local vigil last night and was handed a flyer for the Sept 24th protest. I was planning on going to the DC protest, actually had a hotel reserved but after receiving this flyer, I decided to cancel my trip. WHY?

On this flyer from A.N.S.W.E.R., the top of it read "STOP THE WAR IN IRAQ." You betcha. But then it says:

- Support Palestinian people right of return
- End Colonial Occupation: Iraq, Palestine, Haiti
- US out of the Philippines
- US out of Puerto Rico
etc.

This is looking like a repeat of the Oct 25, 2003 march in San Francisco. I was there at the font of the march and had volunteered to carry an A.N.S.W.E.R. banner. Imagine my surprise when, expecting to carry something about bringing our troops home, I was instead handed a big green "Free Palestine" banner. Huh?

I think A.N.S.W.E.R. needs to learn something about setting priorities and focusing efforts on one thing at a time. While I am certainly sympathetic to many of their other causes, in order to be effective we need to focus our energy on one thing at at time. We are marching in DC against the war in Iraq. Not against the Palestinian occupation. Not about Haiti. Puerto Rico? With all these mixed messages, we on the left wind up looking like disorganized clowns to the media, and they slant their reporting to reflect this perception. We need middle America to hear our voice ABOUT THIS ONE CAUSE. With all the other crap being protested we are going to wind up looking like we do not have our bolts screwed in right.

We are at a turning point in the country thanks to Cindy Sheehan. We need to do this right. We can not afford to make any mistakes here.

When you see the freepers protesting, misguided as they are they at least do it right. They don't dilute their message by trying to heap on every right wing grievance at once. They are there for one cause and one cause only, and they stick to their Rovian talking points. Simple-minded and evil, but effective.

Please keep these protests focused on the war in Iraq. Once we win this, then we can "move on" to the next issue. Success breeds success.

I am calling A.N.S.W.E.R. today to voice my concerns and I hope more of you will join me.

[/ QUOTE ]

And here is an Article urging newly recruited ANSWER members to be 'militant' in infiltrating their campus and local peace rallies.

Re: Anti-war movement a caricature of itself
 

Oh btw

Any evidence supporting either of your claims? Or are you lying?

[ QUOTE ]
"International ANSWER" represents, at the most, a very small fraction of the antiwar movement, and more than likely they are getting significant right-wing support to build their media profile

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
They're usually young Republicans and/or Libertarian Party members who are trying to get those BS flags and banners into news photos of the rally so that they can later accuse their opponents of harboring those same sentiments.

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: Anti-war movement a caricature of itself
 

[ QUOTE ]
And most people are simply stuck in the middle of this mess, just wanting their kids to come home in one piece

[/ QUOTE ]

Now this I actually do find very disingenuous. Are you implying that most parents of adult men and women who voluntarily joined the military during wartime are necessarily anti-war? Or are you implying that most of the protesters at large peace rallies are parents of troops overseas?

Re: Anti-war movement a caricature of itself
 

[ QUOTE ]
Read this Democratic Underground thread, entitled THE ANSWER PROBLEM, located here. Surely these posters (OP and many replies) are in the know.

[/ QUOTE ]

This would also seem to indicate that FreeRepublic board members are clearly in the know on who pulls the strings on the right. I'm genuinely confused anyway; what you're citing now would suggest that indeed, most rank and file attendees of the anti-war events have little to no interest in ANSWER's agenda.

Re: Anti-war movement a caricature of itself
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Read this Democratic Underground thread, entitled THE ANSWER PROBLEM, located here. Surely these posters (OP and many replies) are in the know.

[/ QUOTE ]

This would also seem to indicate that FreeRepublic board members are clearly in the know on who pulls the strings on the right.

[/ QUOTE ]

Clearly I meant "in the know" in response to Q/Q's accusation:

[ QUOTE ]
Riddick, anyone even passingly familiar with ANY recent antiwar demonstrations can see the dishonesty of what you're posting.

[/ QUOTE ]

meaning clearly this poster and other DU posters responding have at least a passing familiarity with recent antiwar demonstrations, yet they clearly agree with me, rendering Q/Q's accusation a bold faced lie.

Re: Anti-war movement a caricature of itself
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'm genuinely confused anyway; what you're citing now would suggest that indeed, most rank and file attendees of the anti-war events have little to no interest in ANSWER's agenda.


[/ QUOTE ]

Well that would be speculation. I certainly don't think most of the attendees give a damn about these Stalinist causes, but that was never my claim. I simply said that these rallies were well-infiltrated or outright staged by Stalinist/Socialist and very dangerous groups, very far from anti-violent, countering HMK's contention that any anti-violence protest was OK. Period.

Re: Anti-war movement a caricature of itself
 

[ QUOTE ]
Wait a minute. ANSWER organizes many anti-war rallies yet you characterize them as a very small fraction of the anti-war movement. Perhaps it is you who are being disingenuous for although true they represent a small fraction of those who oppose the war, they seem to be quite representative of those who fervently oppose the war, after all they are ORGANIZING the rallies Quads.

[/ QUOTE ]

This thread seems a little odd but... the people organizing a rally does not have to be representative of the people attending.

A group of 50 people people can organize a rally attended by 1000's. The organizing group can have many different agendas and goals then the people who show up specificially for that rally.

For instance: Let's say there is a socialist group of 100 people that oppose the war. And there are another 500,000 people unrelated to the socialist group who also oppose the war. They all come together at a war rally organized by the socialist group. Only an idiot would say that the 500,100 people are all socialists.

Re: Anti-war movement a caricature of itself
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm genuinely confused anyway; what you're citing now would suggest that indeed, most rank and file attendees of the anti-war events have little to no interest in ANSWER's agenda.


[/ QUOTE ]

Well that would be speculation. I certainly don't think most of the attendees give a damn about these Stalinist causes, but that was never my claim. I simply said that these rallies were well-infiltrated or outright staged by Stalinist/Socialist and very dangerous groups, very far from anti-violent, countering HMK's contention that any anti-violence protest was OK. Period.

[/ QUOTE ]

FWIW, I don't know any American socialist group that would call itself Stalinist; almost all of them consider themselves Trotskyites or Maoists (and I hardly know of any that think of themselves Maoists, either) -- and that includes WWP. Characterizing groups like WWP into theoretical frameworks is a rather pointless endeavor anyway, as much of their work is merely action-orientated nonsense like their infiltration of anti-war rallies and establishing various front groups, as you cite. Calling them "Stalinist" sounds like you're reaching for a pejorative that is hardly necessary, given that groups like the WWP aren't taken very seriously anyway.

Lastly, you didn't counter HMK's contention that any anti-violence protest was okay -- you attempted to make a case that the anti-war protests are ostensibly anti-violence but are in fact populated/run/organized by violent Marxists; but since you concede most of the attendees aren't interested in the Marxist causes you ascribe to the anti-war events, you seem to have contradicted yourself QED.

Re: Anti-war movement a caricature of itself
 

Well in my attempt to counter HMK I was simply suggesting that a non-violence rally operated/under heavy influence by violent statists of a supreme evil order is not OK. Again, I never indicated anything about the masses of people attending these things. Heck I even attended one in Philly, just to be part of the commotion and see what was going on.

Re: Anti-war movement a caricature of itself
 

[ QUOTE ]
Well in my attempt to counter HMK I was simply suggesting that a non-violence rally operated/under heavy influence by violent statists of a supreme evil order is not OK. Again, I never indicated anything about the masses of people attending these things. Heck I even attended one in Philly, just to be part of the commotion and see what was going on.

[/ QUOTE ]

And at the rate of attemdance inflation by the liberal media you counted for approximately 7.23 protestors in the final estimates. If you had been a celebrity you would have counted as 10.11 protestors...and you werent even there to protest.

Re: Anti-war movement a caricature of itself
 

[ QUOTE ]
FWIW, I don't know any American socialist group that would call itself Stalinist; almost all of them consider themselves Trotskyites or Maoists (and I hardly know of any that think of themselves Maoists, either) -- and that includes WWP.

[/ QUOTE ]

In my experience at Rutgers (for those of you who have never been, go watch P.C.U.), they tend to identify as "anarchists" or "libertarian socialists" or "Chomsky dicksuckers."

Listening to their solutions is pretty entertaining [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Re: Anti-war movement a caricature of itself
 

Hi Riddick,

Sorry. Your news is old. The WWP split from ANSWER.

Re: Anti-war movement a caricature of itself
 

[ QUOTE ]
Any evidence supporting either of your claims?

[/ QUOTE ]

Many years of direct personal experience. I'd name specific names and post photos, but that would not be appropriate to this forum, so I guess you'll either believe me or you won't. I'll live either way.

However, just to illustrate the point, let me give you one generic example. Since you cited a Democratic Underground thread previously, I'm sure you're familiar with the situation of right-wing trolls from sites like FreeRepublic.com who register for that site and then pose as "leftists" in order to post outlandish conspiracy theories to the site. They then use those same posts to try to attack the site as a haven for wackos. (One recent example was the user who posted under the name "seventhson", who spent every day for two years monkeywrenching that site on behalf of FreeRepublic.com. There are plenty of others, but I think the point is made. This tactic is well-established and well-known, and its practitioners border on the obsessive. Users at various right-wing websites actually brag about doing this stuff on a daily basis, so if you want an exhaustive list of examples I suppose the easiest way to get them is straight from the horse's mouth. Of course, since you clearly follow these right-wing websites, I find it impossible to believe that you're not already aware of this practice in pretty good detail, so, again, that brings us right back to the problem of your fundamental dishonesty.)

q/q

Re: Anti-war movement a caricature of itself
 

[ QUOTE ]
And at the rate of attemdance inflation by the liberal media you counted for approximately 7.23 protestors in the final estimates. If you had been a celebrity you would have counted as 10.11 protestors...and you werent even there to protest.

[/ QUOTE ]

I thought that was called WMD math?

Re: Anti-war movement a caricature of itself
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Any evidence supporting either of your claims?


[/ QUOTE ]Many years of direct personal experience. I'd name specific names and post photos, but that would not be appropriate to this forum, so I guess you'll either believe me or you won't. I'll live either way.


[/ QUOTE ]

So its far too much for you to post simple evidence to back up your wild conspiracy theory claims, but after posting exhaustive, irrefutable evidence to back up my simple claim, I'm clearly the one who is fundamentally dishonest.

You make me sick. You're going on ignore.

Re: Anti-war movement a caricature of itself
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Any evidence supporting either of your claims?


[/ QUOTE ]Many years of direct personal experience. I'd name specific names and post photos, but that would not be appropriate to this forum, so I guess you'll either believe me or you won't. I'll live either way.


[/ QUOTE ]

So its far too much for you to post simple evidence to back up your wild conspiracy theory claims, but after posting exhaustive, irrefutable evidence to back up my simple claim, I'm clearly the one who is fundamentally dishonest.

You make me sick. You're going on ignore.

[/ QUOTE ]

what took you so long