It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Worldwide Anti-War Protests Due for March 19th

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 19 2005 @ 02:56 AM
link   


Originally posted by Souljah
Its that time of the year again!

Get your eggs ready, your rotten appels and tomatoes, and lets roll!

I bet american embassies are looking forward to that date!


hahaha, hell yeah... Good to see we're on the same page...

I'm going out to my rally tommorow, members of my Socialist group are expecting no more than 500 heads to turn up
... But I'm hoping for alot more...




posted on Mar, 20 2005 @ 10:39 AM
link   
Jakamo


Yes, immediately. Let the UN go in with a multi-national peacekeeping force once the US leaves.

How long would it take for the UN to "go in" ? They have not shown much in the way of wanting to assist. Since you claim that this is the solution, please show me evidence that the UN is even considering this. If not then you must present another viable option to assist Iraq in emerging from minority Baathist one party rule for the last 40 or so odd years. I will be interested in responses to this.



Stable, multi-party, democratic Iraq? Judges being killed, politicians slaughtered, policemen ambushed and beheaded, daily carbombs, tens of thousands of dead civilians, what exactly is stable about that?


Nowhere in my post did I state that Iraq is currently stable. Once again I ask directly: would not a stable, multi party democratic Iraq that is learning how to work with the various ethnic/religous groups within itself be in the Iraqi's and the worlds best interest? That is the goal/end result, not the current situation. What would be your goal for Iraq? And give concrete examples of how to acheive it, if you please.



Iraq has been around for thousands of years, the Iraqi people are strong enough and smart enough to think for themselves, they don't need you in their country "helping" to liberate them from their oilfields.

I am aware of the history of the area thank you. I seem to recall that after the Gulf War, Iraqis (Shiites in south, Kurds in the North) rose up against the Sunni Minority and with no support from the outside world got brutally put down by the remnants of Saddam's Army. Is this what you mean by them not needing "help". I think it would be great if nations that are under totaltarian regimes could rise up and take back their country. Sometimes it works peacefully, most recently Ukraine other times the Regime is too powerful and squashes the attempt. Does this mean that if a regime is too strong that we should do nothing. The world is littered with the results of not doing anything (Dafur, Balkans, Rwanda) www.genocidewatch.org...

Sometimes action is needed, often times with results that are imperfect but better than the status quo of not acting.

Peace



posted on Mar, 20 2005 @ 01:57 PM
link   
Protests amounted to being a failure overall?
Thousands in Europe with a population of how many millions?
Thousands in the UK with a population of how many millions?
Thousands in Canada with a population of haw many millions?

The anti-war protests were in cities with population sof how many?

Protests took place in the US, here is a comparison:


In New York City (population: 8,085,742), hundreds listened to anti-war speeches at the United Nations, then marched to Times Square, carrying dozens of cardboard coffins draped in black cloth or the American flag. While thousands of people marked the second anniversary of the war in Iraq with a protest in Central Park yesterday.

In San Francisco (population: 751,682), hundreds of protesters rallied in Dolores Park.

In Chicago (population: 2,869,121), one thousand anti-war activists gathered in Federal Plaza Saturday.

In Los Angeles (population: 3,819,951), the LA Times reported 4,000.

In Honolulu (population: 380,149), about 300 people marched and rallied to mark the second anniversary of the U.S. invasion of Iraq and to urge an end to the war.

In Seattle (population: 569,101), organizers put the number of anti-war protesters at Seattle Center. participants at 5,000, so divide this number by 2 or 3.

And at Ft. Bragg, Fayetville, N. C. (population: 121,015), N.C., the demonstration was the largest, with 3,000 demonstrators, of 800 Held Across the U.S. to Mark 2nd Anniversary of Conflict. And the anti-war crowd bused people in from all over the country.

Anti-war demonstrations fail to draw expected numbers.

Now before you start your logical fallaies attacks [specifically your Ad Hominem attacks] the source should not really be considered: it is the information given.

Seems to me, that when using a search engine to verify where the protest took place and then consider the population within that region or city, etc., the source(s) appear to be correct? Instead of the protests growing, as they did during the Vietnam War, they appear to be shrinking....

Just how successful were the protests, eh? As such, other than freedom to express, the protests did or do what? Make you feel better?





seekerof


dh

posted on Mar, 20 2005 @ 06:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
Protests amounted to being a failure overall?
Thousands in Europe with a population of how many millions?
Thousands in the UK with a population of how many millions?
Thousands in Canada with a population of haw many millions?

The anti-war protests were in cities with population sof how many?

Protests took place in the US, here is a comparison:


In New York City (population: 8,085,742), hundreds listened to anti-war speeches at the United Nations, then marched to Times Square, carrying dozens of cardboard coffins draped in black cloth or the American flag. While thousands of people marked the second anniversary of the war in Iraq with a protest in Central Park yesterday.

In San Francisco (population: 751,682), hundreds of protesters rallied in Dolores Park.

In Chicago (population: 2,869,121), one thousand anti-war activists gathered in Federal Plaza Saturday.

In Los Angeles (population: 3,819,951), the LA Times reported 4,000.

In Honolulu (population: 380,149), about 300 people marched and rallied to mark the second anniversary of the U.S. invasion of Iraq and to urge an end to the war.

In Seattle (population: 569,101), organizers put the number of anti-war protesters at Seattle Center. participants at 5,000, so divide this number by 2 or 3.

And at Ft. Bragg, Fayetville, N. C. (population: 121,015), N.C., the demonstration was the largest, with 3,000 demonstrators, of 800 Held Across the U.S. to Mark 2nd Anniversary of Conflict. And the anti-war crowd bused people in from all over the country.

Anti-war demonstrations fail to draw expected numbers.

Now before you start your logical fallaies attacks [specifically your Ad Hominem attacks] the source should not really be considered: it is the information given.

Seems to me, that when using a search engine to verify where the protest took place and then consider the population within that region or city, etc., the source(s) appear to be correct? Instead of the protests growing, as they did during the Vietnam War, they appear to be shrinking....

Just how successful were the protests, eh? As such, other than freedom to express, the protests did or do what? Make you feel better?





seekerof


Perhaps those who know what's going on cant bear to get behind banners commanding governments to stop this do that, knowing the governments are agenda-driven and take not the slightest notice of what people want
Perhaps there are too many dummies sitting at home in their spare time watching stupefying programs on their TV to avoid their anxiety that there's something wrong and there's nothing they can do about it
Perhaps if the truth about the criminality of Western governance is put on the street people will be able to respond
Focus on the mass murder and the rip-offs, rather than the no war and the peace, and the trillionnaire control of the world, and the people might be able to respond
No use making demands of our control system
Just back 'em off with truth



posted on Mar, 20 2005 @ 07:06 PM
link   
what i found strange was that the site mentioned my city as a location for one of those protests, but in the days and weeks prior I had not heard anything about such a protest. No newspaper coverage, nothing, how are people supposed to show up for protests when in most cases they didn't even know their city was having one.



posted on Mar, 20 2005 @ 07:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by worldwatcher
what i found strange was that the site mentioned my city as a location for one of those protests, but in the days and weeks prior I had not heard anything about such a protest. No newspaper coverage, nothing, how are people supposed to show up for protests when in most cases they didn't even know their city was having one.


That's what I was thinking too. If I would of known about one in my city, I probably would have been there too. These things need better organization.



posted on Mar, 20 2005 @ 08:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
Protests amounted to being a failure overall?
Thousands in Europe with a population of how many millions?
Thousands in the UK with a population of how many millions?
Thousands in Canada with a population of haw many millions?




These analogies are getting really dumb.

When is a protest successful?

also...

When is national security successful?

When is a war effort successful?

When is a posse successful?


also...

When is an election successful?

When is propaganda successful?

When are lies successful?

When is denial sucessful?



posted on Mar, 20 2005 @ 08:15 PM
link   
When is a protest successful, MaskedAvatar?
Not certain except that when you look at how they played out and influenced outcomes during the Vietnam War, maybe?

Apparently, despite your rhetoric, the protest that occur today over Iraq, are nothing when compared to those during the Vietnam War. Those of today are diffently from those of yesteryear, despite them being over the same reasons: anti-war. Success is thus measureable. The ones that took place this month are only more proof to the fact that they are not successful and can be quantified, measureably.

Which one did you attend?





seekerof

[edit on 20-3-2005 by Seekerof]



posted on Mar, 20 2005 @ 08:15 PM
link   


Originally posted by worldwatcher
in the days and weeks prior I had not heard anything about such a protest. No newspaper coverage, nothing, how are people supposed to show up for protests when in most cases they didn't even know their city was having one.


Why do you think that happened? What the people dont see can't hurt them, or the government I should say... You'd find it would have been in any/all of the Left-Wing newspapers... As for news coverage - the major ones wouldn't have shown anything because they would have had uncle sam whispering in their ears...

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There was only about 400 at my turnout...
... Better than nothing, we made people stop and listen atleast... They had no choice, their cars couldn't move...



posted on Mar, 20 2005 @ 08:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof Success is thus measureable. The ones that took place this month are only more proof to the fact that they are not successful and can be quantified, measureably.


So they are less successful than those during Vietnam? So what? I don't think that really means anything. People will still continue to voice their opinions and people will continue to protest. This just seems to be an observation with no value except to those interested in the specific statistics.



posted on Mar, 20 2005 @ 08:40 PM
link   


Originally posted by Jamuhn
So they are less successful than those during Vietnam? So what? I don't think that really means anything. People will still continue to voice their opinions and people will continue to protest.


Remember that the protests against the Vietnam War did not attain any significance in the overall scheme of things for atleast the first three years... It was after that the protests started to mean anything...

The protests will reach their goal, it all depends on how long the occupation of Iraq lasts...



posted on Mar, 20 2005 @ 08:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
When is a protest successful, MaskedAvatar?
Not certain except that when you look at how they played out and influenced outcomes during the Vietnam War, maybe?

Apparently, despite your rhetoric, the protest that occur today over Iraq, are nothing when compared to those during the Vietnam War. Those of today are diffently from those of yesteryear, despite them being over the same reasons: anti-war. Success is thus measureable. The ones that took place this month are only more proof to the fact that they are not successful and can be quantified, measureably.

Which one did you attend?



I attended all of them. It is not hard to do.

The protests of today are not simply anti-war. They are also anti-government-lies, anti-hypocrisy, anti-greed, anti-profiteering.

I fail to see any 'measure' in your above posts. But I expect that more cities in more countries demonstrating more anti-Iraq-occupation sentiments is a bigger voice than the that of US peace protests in the 1960s, by far.

Except that in the 1960s, in the very country that committed the protested foreign incursion, the government of the day had not restricted protests to certain zones under threat of invocation of a piece of BS national security law bordering on martial law. The US has marched backwards 60 years in the past five as a result of the quietly observed stripping of rights and government-sponsored terrorism. That is the effect of your kind of toothless protest about protests...



posted on Mar, 20 2005 @ 10:15 PM
link   
www.hoffmania.com...


New York, San Francisco, Madrid and more.

Signs are interesting. I had not seen "Bliar" before, and the bubble boy comment at the bottom is an apt description.



posted on Mar, 20 2005 @ 11:25 PM
link   
Ah, war protest season. I don't know the definition of "success" as in "was the war protest a success." What ever happened to writing to your congressman?

My personal favorite type of anti-war rally/protest is the kinda where someone reads the names of all the troops that have died in the war. I mean, geez, I knew some of these guys - they don't support what the protesters are doing. They died for something they believed in. I wouldn't want my name read in protest in front of a group of people who think what I've done is terrible.



posted on Mar, 23 2005 @ 12:25 PM
link   
pavil:

How long would it take for the UN to "go in" ? They have not shown much in the way of wanting to assist. Since you claim that this is the solution, please show me evidence that the UN is even considering this. If not then you must present another viable option to assist Iraq in emerging from minority Baathist one party rule for the last 40 or so odd years. I will be interested in responses to this.


First off, it was the USA that didn't show much in the way of wanting to assist the UN. It was "y'all" that said you didn't need the UN and went in anyway. And lookie lookie, you're effed.

The UN peacekeeping force is doing just fine in Afghanistan. So you pull US troops out of Iraq and you put in UN multinational troops or you get the UN to assemble an Iraqi force of other countries.

Would it work? You betcha. Would it be less violent than it is now? Yep. Get some people in there who KNOW the language, KNOW the culture and who don't shoot first and ask questions later.


Nowhere in my post did I state that Iraq is currently stable. Once again I ask directly: would not a stable, multi party democratic Iraq that is learning how to work with the various ethnic/religous groups within itself be in the Iraqi's and the worlds best interest? That is the goal/end result, not the current situation. What would be your goal for Iraq? And give concrete examples of how to acheive it, if you please.


FYI, democracy is not something that has anything to do with "the world's best interests". Democracy in Iraq is trying to be according to IRAQI'S BEST INTERESTS? You remember the Iraqis? They've lived there for thousands of years?

When the US says something is in the "world's best interests", those of us who are not functionally retarded realize they are saying "America's best interests". Ask me for an example.


I am aware of the history of the area thank you. I seem to recall that after the Gulf War, Iraqis (Shiites in south, Kurds in the North) rose up against the Sunni Minority and with no support from the outside world got brutally put down by the remnants of Saddam's Army. Is this what you mean by them not needing "help". I think it would be great if nations that are under totaltarian regimes could rise up and take back their country. Sometimes it works peacefully, most recently Ukraine other times the Regime is too powerful and squashes the attempt. Does this mean that if a regime is too strong that we should do nothing. The world is littered with the results of not doing anything.


The USA GAVE Saddam PERMISSION to use attack helicopters to quell the Kurdish rebellion. The US had defeated the Iraqis and they had no fly zones up, they had grounded ALL OTHER IRAQI MILITARY AIR TRAFFIC, but it wasn't in their best interests to see Iraq get taken over by a Kurdish/Shi'ite movement that they had no ties to and that might not want to deal with a Western power when it came to oil.

It came down to "better to deal with the Devil you know, than the Devil you don't know."

Bottom line is you deal with the Devil constantly, when it's in America's best interests, and if it means the streets are littered with foreign corpses, then so be it.

Seekerof:

Seems to me, that when using a search engine to verify where the protest took place and then consider the population within that region or city, etc., the source(s) appear to be correct? Instead of the protests growing, as they did during the Vietnam War, they appear to be shrinking....

Just how successful were the protests, eh? As such, other than freedom to express, the protests did or do what? Make you feel better?


How successful? Well, if you measure success as "I live in a democratic country and I disagree with what my government does in my name so I want to get together with like-minded people and exercise my right to assemble and my right to free speech" then it was WILDLY successful.

Did I think that after the protests the Bush Administartion would say "Wow, we better listen"? Nope. Because the Bush Administration doesn't listen to anyone who doesn't line their fat pockets with donations and kickbacks.

I did it because I disagree with all this, and when my children ask me about it in 10 years and I say I disagreed with it and what did I do, I can tell them I TOOK ACTION...

Because, believe me, years from now when these lies and frauds are exposed, I will feel emancipated that I saw these liars for what they are and I actually DID something to support my fellow human beings.

I feel successful in that.


Good article on coverage of these protests by the US Media in the Land of the Free (?).

www.counterpunch.org...


CNN ignored the anti-war protests completely too, likewise preferring to blow its daily news budget Saturday and Sunday on the Shiavo flap and the sad tale of the rape and murder of a nine-year-old girl, allegedly by a paroled sex offender.

Most outrageously, no major media covered the remarkable 4500-person protest in Fayetteville, North Carolina outside Ft. Bragg, which featured large numbers of former military personnel marching against the war, including Camilo Mejia, recently released from 9 months in a military brig for desertion from his army unit (he refused to return to Iraq after doing one tour there, saying it was an illegal, immoral war of aggression).

Apparently, like Congress, where Democrats and Republicans alike have spent more time fulminating over and interfering in the issue of when to let poor Schiavo die than on the matter of providing another $82 billion in funding for the ongoing slaughter of innocents in Iraq, the corporate media feel that the sad plight of one lone woman on a feeding tube is more important than the lives of 150,000 U.S. servicemen and 30 million Arabs and Kurds.


jako



[edit on 23-3-2005 by Jakomo]



posted on Mar, 23 2005 @ 12:31 PM
link   
yo Jakomo the UN is not doing fine in peacekeeping in Afghanistan because there are no UN peacekeepers in Afghanistan, the peacekeepers are led by NATO alliance, there are however UN observers who mostly deal with humanitarian aid and seeing the election results. just correcting you on that one.



posted on Mar, 23 2005 @ 12:57 PM
link   
deltaboy: My mistake. It is NATO that has the military there, it's the UN that is in there trying to dispense aid.

www.unama-afg.org...


Sorry



posted on Mar, 23 2005 @ 03:04 PM
link   
www.un.org...



The UN peacekeeping force is doing just fine in Afghanistan. So you pull US troops out of Iraq and you put in UN multinational troops or you get the UN to assemble an Iraqi force of other countries.


Umm isn't it a NATO force that is in Afganistan?

I Know I'm beating a dead horse but what do you think is the best course for Iraq, the one party minority rule of Saddam's Baath Party or a chance for them to form a multiparty government more representative of the peoples of Iraq? Self determination for Iraq is in Iraq and the US and World's best interest in my opinion.



posted on Mar, 23 2005 @ 03:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Souljah
Its that time of the year again!

Get your eggs ready, your rotten appels and tomatoes, and lets roll!

I bet american embassies are looking forward to that date!



American Embassies really don't have a problem with protest from the local nationals.....with the exception France, Aus, Germany and the usual suspects.

Most people (I did'nt say gov'ts) in third world countries support the war because they understand where the oppressed Iraqi's are coming from.

And please, don't reply with a link to a news art telling about U.S. Embassies abroad under protest...I know it goes on, Im just saying for the most part.

And by the way, I think it's good to go if someone protest the war...but the minute they protest the troops/Marines they become WRONG!!!!


Just thought I would throught in my 2 cents as you always do....I can't believe we give people like you freedom of speech...but that's how it is

[edit on 23-3-2005 by dev_add]



posted on Mar, 23 2005 @ 03:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by dev_add
Most people (I did'nt say gov'ts) in third world countries support the war because they understand where the oppressed Iraqi's are coming from.




That's news!

With a well presented story pointing to all the international research on this, and how much support indigenous populations and peasant populations and village populations and workers in underdevloped countries give to the Bush administration's foreign incursions, this should be headline material at ATSNN.

I look forward to the substantiation of this, it's great.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join