How come there are not organized political groups designed to facilitate peace??? I mean, I'm sure there is but where are the MAINSTREAM bloc of people (say Israeli and Palestinian) who want to sit down at a table and iron out their differences. Or an American group who wants to discuss with Muslim countries why it is they hate us?

Where are the Kennedys, Martin Luther Kings and Ghandis of this generation???
[This message was edited Fri Sep 27 17:16:11 PDT 2002 by divo02]

Over 600 political activists arrested in DC today??? hmmm, so that's where.

todays protesters were arrested for protesting the world banking thingie in DC..

however, a lot of those people arrested came to DC for peace protests that will be taking place sat & sun...


interestingly enough, i was listening to a discussion about the lack of peace protesting (expecially amoung college students) this time around..they pointed out the protesters who came out when Clinton recommended to send more people in to Bosnia (???)...yet, Bush is asking for more severe measures and most of the peace activists are quiet...

the speaker pointed out that the severity and urgency is not registering with young people...i happen to think that a part of it has to do with how well Bush's Admin has campaigned this whole Patriotism movement...so well that people feel like its un-American to object to Bush's plans...which, ironically, is a very un-American attitude to have...

SkletonKee said:

or maybe they just actually agree with him. or if not with him, at least on going into Iraq. it's not so unheard of, you know. in fact, the majority of Americans feel that way.

oh, and a lot of those "protesters" arrested today are the same ones that are arrested every time the world bank or the wto convenes. they're the trouble-makers that riot and ruin at otherwise peaceful protests.

Im in Amnesty International and right now we are working on a protest 2 the war on Iraq. However not all members want 2 protest it (myself). I suggested we have an open campus-wide discussion b4 we have people coming 2 conclusions based on little knowledge. Every1 thought that was a good idea, so it's gonna happen.

I think many people need 2 make an educated guess not just "Bush is stupid, he just wants war cuz he's a war-lover" or "Bush is great, he can do no wrong. he has no alterior motives whatsoever"

Both statements are false.

By the way, CLOSE THE SOA!


Thank u.

divo02 said:

Right here, reporting for duty.

Nep2nes said:

a thought-out, well-reasoned idea, from Nep2nes. a simplistic one, but hey, good job!

AaronForever said:

You know it is just a ruse... there is no depth there...

IceNine said:

yes. it is both simplistic, yet well-reasoned by her. she's only capable of so much.

Nep2nes said:

I guess they let anybody in these days.

Britons March Against War With Iraq
More Than 150,000 Protesters March in London Urging United States, Britain Not to Invade Iraq

The Associated Press



L O N D O N, Sept. 28 — More than 150,000 Britons from all regions, ages and social backgrounds, marched in central London Saturday, urging Prime Minister Tony Blair and President Bush not to invade Iraq.

As they wound their way from Embankment on the River Thames to Hyde Park, many of the marchers stopped to shout through the gates of Blair's 10 Downing St. residence.

"Tony Blair, shame, shame, no more killing in my name," went one chant.

"We believe it would be wholly immoral and wrong and criminal for the United States and Britain to attack Iraq and inflict casualties upon innocent people," Tony Benn, a former Labor Party legislator and veteran left-winger, told a huge crowd seated in Hyde Park. "We must see it is not allowed to happen."

Tam Dalyell, a senior Labor Party legislator, said the confrontation with Iraq was the most dangerous standoff since the Cuban missile crisis.

"We are sleepwalking to disaster," he said, to thunderous applause from the crowd.

Streams of people poured out of subway stations near the march's starting point and demonstrators at the back of the march were still setting off from Embankment after those at the front had reached Hyde Park, more than a mile away.

Scotland Yard said more than 150,000 demonstrators took part in the march.

The Stop the War Coalition, which helped organize the march, estimated that 400,000 people took part.

There were many families in the crowd. Parents pushed babies in strollers; the young, old and middle aged from all social backgrounds walked the route, some waving placards, some blowing whistles or banging drums.

"Don't be bullied by Bush," read one placard. "No war for oil. Stop the war machine," said another.

"Iraq is not our enemy, stop Bush," said a homemade banner carried by Irial Eno, 12, who attended the rally with her sister, mother and grandmother.

Irial's mother, Anthea Eno, said she would support an attack on Iraq if it had United Nations backing, but added that she did not expect that to happen.

"There must be some other way," she said. "People are going to suffer, as always."

The march came as Britain and the United States worked together on a draft resolution on Iraq which they plan to propose to the United Nations. It would call on Saddam to reveal all materials relating to weapons of mass destruction and to give U.N. weapons inspectors unfettered access to presidential sites.

Blair has been Bush's staunchest ally on Iraq and last week released a dossier claiming Saddam Hussein has stockpiled chemical and biological weapons, and is trying to develop nuclear arms.

Legislators from the prime minister's own Labor Party are among the leaders of the Stop the War Coalition, which organized the march with the Muslim Association of Britain.

The march was also meant as a protest against Israel's policies in the West Bank and Gaza, and many protesters expressed sympathy for the Palestinian cause. "Stop Israeli war crimes," said one sign.

"These people are saying clearly two things no to war against Iraq, yes to a Palestinian state," said Michel Massih, chairman of a group called Palestinian Community.

A couple of London shoppers, halted by the march as it wound toward Piccadilly Circus, said they were lucky to live in a place where people were allowed to express themselves so freely.

"When we lived in Saudi Arabia, we didn't have any marches like this," said Brian McGuire, who spent four years in the Middle Eastern country.

Police said only three people were arrested for minor offenses and said demonstrators were dispersing peacefully.

AaronForever said:

dont believe the hype...already support for involvment in Iraq is dropping...*and* Bushes approval ratings are dropping *again*..(after a spike right after his UN speech)...

what happens is, Bush gives these great simple-minded speeches that average-joe American understands and appreciates...Then, those who actually understand the complexities of what Bush is proposing (here and in the rest of the world) analyse and point out the major faults and flaws of...average-joe once again realizes what a dork Bush is and his approval starts to drop...this has been happening since day one of his admin...even after Sept 11th...

dont forget, many of Bush's Republican Party Leaders opposed what Bush is proposiing...Currently they are staying silent...why? ELECTION TIME!! how appropriate...but im sure more opposition will start after the elections...

oh oh oh..btw: both President Clinton and Presidential Candidate Bob Dole agree that Bush's plan of attacking Iraq is flawed...

SkletonKee said:

as do I. the plan. but not that it needs to be done.

in fact, I think Bush is going about this whole thing completely wrong. unfortunately, he's the man doing the job.

Regime change or disarmament? This is the central issue yet I think most people haven't decided if they wnat one or both.

Hussein is gonna go---the USA and Britain r going 2 oust him surely enough b4 he's dead. But I don't think now is the right time. The thing 2 do right now is disarm him, and let Blix do his freaking job. Let him go there, make the inspections happen, then take it from there. I don't think the old rules apply 2 Hussein anymore, because he didnt even COMPLY 2 those rules.

After a decade of getting a slap on the hand from the U.N.- he now needs a kick in the ass, IMHO.

With the economy in the state it is, it would be in our best interest not have a full-fledged war. But surely if we waited until we were stronger, THEN ousted him, it would help our economy 2 have all that oil. I was watching thisWEEK with george Stephanopoulos and they were talking about this. Im amazed by the intelligence of some of these people on the panel. especially the older guy with glasses!

Senator McDermott made an ass out of himself with his comment that we should take Hussein's word at face value and consider the President 2 b a liar. They were all joking that they were surprised he wasnt being paid 2 b Hussein's spokesperson. I feel sorry 4 him when he comes back from Iraq. What a dipstick.

.
[This message was edited Sun Sep 29 12:13:45 PDT 2002 by Nep2nes]

.

nevermind...
[This message was edited Sun Sep 29 12:19:17 PDT 2002 by AaronForever]

Nep2nes said:

I thought it was Congressman McDermott? and he didnt make an arse of himself...he just pointed out the fact that Presidents in the past have misinformed the american people on foriegn policy to drum up support for war...he sitted Vietnam in paticular...all he was saying is that Bush, if he wants support for action needs to stop making these blanket statements and come out with the concrete evidence against Iraq...He never said he believed Saddam or that he supported him...thats all spin from George Will (the old guy with the glasses)...



touch the edit!!!
[This message was edited Sun Sep 29 12:32:15 PDT 2002 by SkletonKee]

SkletonKee said:

Senate + House = Congress

"con" means "2gether" meaning that a senator can be called a "congressman" too. U didnt know that Congressman was a term that could apply 2 a senator OR a Representative of the House? Wow.


What does it matter, anyway...
[This message was edited Sun Sep 29 12:54:26 PDT 2002 by Nep2nes]

SkletonKee said:

I understand what he was trying 2 say, but he said that Bush is lying...then he said b4 that that Hussein's words should be taken as truth. That's just not a good thing 2 say.

Even the panelists said that.

Nep2nes said:

oh my god...are u serious? a congressman is elected by district...a senator by the entire state...this is basic US government 101...

Nep2nes said:

I understand what he was trying 2 say, but he said that Bush is lying...then he said b4 that that Hussein's words should be taken as truth. That's just not a good thing 2 say.

Even the panelists said that.[/quote]


No, George Will (an ultra conservative) said it...And when dealing with diplomacy, you do have to take the other sides word as truth..until they prove otherwise...and he didnt say Bush was lying...He said that Bush wasnt being forecoming with information...


oh oh oh, and Bush's Admin has already pointed out that they might need to lie in order to protect america's best interest...this was stated right after Sept. 11th...