|
|
|
| Guest Book (1934 Posts)
|
| Topic |
Guest Book |
|
|
|
On 11/24/2003
Sparker
wrote in from
(194.176.nnn.nnn)
MissouriMatt,
Just to make things clear. I was pretty sure you were only trying to stir up a little debate.
I, personnally, took absloutely zero offence in what you wrote about my home country.
I just added my pennys-worth to the discussion.
Cheers
Sparker
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 11/24/2003 MissouriMatt
wrote in from
(128.206.nnn.nnn)
I bow out of the conversation regarding war with these final thoughts. But be sure I’ll read a few posts from time to time to see how the debate rages. This conversation makes more sense than fighting over bearings!
First, I’m sorry I brought up Northern Ireland. I did it just to push some buttons and I definitely have very limited knowledge of the conflict. I hope those wounds heal soon. It seems like a senseless tragedy from my limited perspective.
Second, once hatred and revenge color your thinking and policy you’re headed down a sad path, but making the right decisions regarding how to handle terrorist aggression is difficult even if you can keep hatred and revenge out of the picture. Bush is taking an aggressive approach. Americans that believe the government of Iraq helped provide safe haven for terrorists who would do all sorts of nasty things to innocent Americans if given half the chance are likely to support Bush’s approach.
Dealing with a rouge government that does not have free elections is tough. The British left may hope that Americans write their congressmen and force a change in policy. Perhaps the next election will provide a change in leadership that the British left would be more supportive of. But what do you hope for as an American that is fearful of the policies in Iraq under Saddam?
Personally I’ve been a bit of an isolationist regarding foreign policy. I’m not eager to force American views on others. I’d rather it was our students, tourists, businessmen and missionaries, not our diplomats and bureaucrats that traveled the globe influencing the world’s opinion of the US and its citizens.
I think a lot of Americans asked themselves in the wake of 9/11 if this was something we could stay out of, but the images of that day pushed us toward action. Ultimately many Americans didn’t view 9/11 as the action of a few international bad guys, but rather, the actions of government supported terrorists (or at least government condoned). We’re now at war with those terrorists on their soil. And it’s ugly. I don’t think anyone likes this. Not even Bush. We just couldn’t figure out how to walk away and still feel as if we were defending ourselves. They pushed our buttons and it worked. The only person that got what he wanted was Bin Laden and a few crazy terrorists. I believe that the image of Americans as the willing aggressors is spin from the left. Collectively, I believe a narrow majority of Americans felt our hand was forced, and we made a tough decision. Bush made the call and he, like Tony, will take the heat. I know we’ve made some mistakes in foreign policy. Perhaps next time the terrorists will pick a more sensible balanced country to attack.
God bless all that seek peace. I pray they find it.
God be with those that defend the innocent when peace is shattered.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 11/24/2003 jonnyx
wrote in from
(195.92.nnn.nnn)
war ended communism did it? not in vietnam it didnt.
i must have missed that whole episode, i thought gorbachov realised it was futile to carry on without a shot being fired.
please explain.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 11/23/2003
War Pig
wrote in from
(206.40.nnn.nnn)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 11/23/2003 jonnyx
wrote in from
(195.92.nnn.nnn)
well said michael
shortly after 9-11 i spoke to jerry varson at the NYPD press office (212 374 5410) about accountability for those who funded terror in our country. his answer - "one mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter"
i couldnt agree more, but i didnt expect him to be quite so brazen.
then i spoke to noraid (212 736 1916) and they said pretty much the same thing.
i thought while i was at it i should run it by the israeli embassy in london (+44 (0) 20 795 79500)(theyre not averse to letting off explosions in civilian areas themselves) but they just said theyd never heard of such a thing. pfffffffffffff
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 11/23/2003
Michael
wrote in from
(195.92.nnn.nnn)
Thanks Missouri Rat for showing us you limited knowledge of Northern Irish politics. Sparker has explained it well. Take note.
For many years the IRA was funded in a large part by Noraid in the US. That dried up very quickly after 9/11 , when many people realised that terrorism isnt a solution. As someone who was caught up in a bomb blast in London and had glass shatterring around me, I know that a simplistic view of Irish politics doesnt work...What I do know is that by putting money in a bucket marked "for the cause" isnt the way forward.
When you can come up with a good solution to the Northern Irish problem, please let us know. It isnt as easy as getting British troops out. Honest.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 11/23/2003 Freedom Of Speech
wrote in from
(68.117.nnn.nnn)
FBI scrutinizing anti-war protesters
Bureau wants anti-terror units to review suspicious activities
Eric Lichtblau, New York Times
Sunday, November 23, 2003
Washington -- The FBI has collected extensive information on the tactics, training and organization of antiwar demonstrators and has advised local law enforcement officials to report any suspicious activity at protests to its counterterrorism squads, according to interviews and a confidential bureau memorandum.
The memorandum, which the bureau sent to local law enforcement agencies last month in advance of antiwar demonstrations in Washington and San Francisco, detailed how protesters have sometimes used "training camps" to rehearse for demonstrations, the Internet to raise money, and gas masks to defend against tear gas. The memorandum analyzed lawful activities such as recruiting demonstrators, as well as illegal activities such as using fake documentation to get into a secured site.
FBI officials said in interviews that the intelligence- gathering effort was aimed at identifying anarchists and "extremist elements" plotting violence, not at monitoring the political speech of law-abiding protesters.
In San Francisco -- site of some of the nation's largest protests against the war in Iraq -- a source in the police department told The Chronicle on Saturday he had no knowledge of such a memo. But in March, San Francisco police acknowledged conducting undercover surveillance of protesters, including videotaping by plainclothes officers at three demonstrations, and said the practice was commonplace, especially if there were a possibility of violence.
California Attorney General Bill Lockyer issued guidelines in July specifying that state and local law enforcement agencies shouldn't spy on political protesters without reasonable suspicion of criminal activity. He said the guidelines were needed after U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft authorized federal agents to monitor political and religious groups without evidence of criminal activity, something Lockyer said is prohibited by California's constitution.
The FBI initiative has won the support of some local police, who view it as a critical way to maintain order at large-scale demonstrations. Indeed, some law enforcement officials said they believed the FBI's approach had helped to ensure that nationwide antiwar demonstrations in recent months, drawing hundreds of thousands of protesters, remained largely free of violence and disruption.
But Bay Area peace activists said the tactic will discourage ordinary citizens from voicing dissent against their government.
"The intent is to have a chilling effect on free speech and the right to demonstrate,'' said Richard Becker, a member of the steering committee of Act Now to Stop War and End Racism, the large coalition of peace groups that has organized many of the protests against the Iraq war. "We believe they intend to use this information to disrupt social movements. They're trying to make a connection between terrorism and people exercising their First Amendment rights.''
Jason Mark, an organizer for San Francisco-based Global Exchange, said the FBI memo is "terrifying and highly disturbing.''
Particularly chilling, he said, was the use of the phrase "training camps'' to describe instruction on nonviolence given to demonstrators. That phrase is often used to describe terrorist training sites.
"What we do is sit people down and teach them how to engage in nonviolence, in the manner of Gandhi and Martin Luther King,'' he said. "The phrase 'training camps' is loaded and nothing short of a slur campaign.''
Some civil rights advocates and legal scholars said the monitoring program could signal a return to the well-documented abuses of the 1960s and '70s, when J. Edgar Hoover was the FBI director and agents routinely spied on political protesters like the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. and musician John Lennon.
A Chronicle investigation last year documented the FBI's surveillance of Free Speech Movement activists and other politically engaged students at UC Berkeley in the 1960s.
"The FBI is dangerously targeting Americans who are engaged in nothing more than lawful protest and dissent," said Anthony Romero, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union. "The line between terrorism and legitimate civil disobedience is blurred, and I have a serious concern about whether we're going back to the days of Hoover."
The abuses of the Hoover era, which included efforts by the FBI to harass and discredit Hoover's political enemies under a program known as Cointelpro, led to tight restrictions on FBI investigations of political activities.
Those restrictions were relaxed significantly last year, when Attorney General John Ashcroft issued guidelines giving FBI agents authority to attend political rallies, mosques and any event "that is open to the public."
Ashcroft said the Sept. 11 attacks made it essential that the FBI be allowed to investigate terrorism more aggressively. The bureau's recent strategy in policing demonstrations is an outgrowth of that policy, officials said.
"We're not concerned with individuals who are exercising their constitutional rights," one FBI official said. "But it's obvious that there are individuals capable of violence at these events. We know that there are anarchists that are actively involved in trying to sabotage and commit acts of violence at these different events, and we also know that these large gatherings would be a prime target for terrorist groups."
Civil rights advocates have complained for months that federal officials have surreptitiously sought to suppress the First Amendment rights of antiwar demonstrators.
Critics of the Bush administration's Iraq policy, for instance, have sued the government to learn how their names ended up on a "no fly" list used to stop suspected terrorists from boarding planes. And the New York Police Department this year questioned many of those arrested at demonstrations about their political affiliations, before halting the practice and expunging the data in the face of public criticism.
The FBI memorandum, however, appears to offer the first corroboration of a coordinated nationwide effort to collect intelligence regarding demonstrations.
The memorandum, circulated on Oct. 15 -- just 10 days before many thousands gathered in Washington and San Francisco to protest the U.S. occupation of Iraq -- noted that the bureau "possesses no information indicating that violent or terrorist activities are being planned as part of these protests" and that "most protests are peaceful events."
But it pointed to violence at protests against the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank as evidence of potential disruption. Law enforcement officials said in interviews that they had become particularly concerned about the ability of anti- government groups to exploit demonstrations and promote a violent agenda.
"What a great opportunity for an act of terrorism, when all your resources are dedicated to some big event and you let your guard down," a law enforcement official involved in securing recent demonstrations said.
The memorandum urged local law enforcement officials "to be alert to these possible indicators of protest activity and report any potentially illegal acts" to counterterrorism task forces run by the FBI. It warned about an array of threats, including homemade bombs and the formation of human chains.
The memorandum also discussed "innovative strategies" used by demonstrators, like the videotaping of arrests as a means of "intimidation" against the police. And it noted that protesters "often use the Internet to recruit, raise funds and coordinate their activities prior to demonstrations."
Officials said the FBI treats demonstrations no differently than other large-scale and vulnerable gatherings. The aim, they said, was not to monitor protesters but to gather intelligence.
Critics said they remained worried. "What the FBI regards as potential terrorism," Romero of the ACLU said, "strikes me as civil disobedience."
Chronicle staff writers Tyche Hendricks and Steve Rubenstein contributed to this report.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 11/23/2003
Sparker
wrote in from
(194.176.nnn.nnn)
MissouriMatt
A Lot of people in Northern Ireland want Britain out.
A Lot of people in Northern Ireland want them to stay.
A lot of people in Northern Ireland don't care one way or another.
A lot of people in The Republic Ireland want a united Ireland.
A lot of people in the Republic of Ireland don't want the North.
I guess you just can't please everybody (or anybody it seems!)
Cheers
Sparker
Belfast
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 11/23/2003 sorry again
wrote in from
(81.132.nnn.nnn)
By the way, only a moron could really think that the 'socialist' in Hitler's party name has anything to do with Socialism.
Hope the text fits on my screen now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 11/23/2003 sorry
wrote in from
(81.132.nnn.nnn)
just posting this to push Jonnyx's big pic off the 'newest 25' and make the text readable without horizontal scrolling
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 11/22/2003 jonnyx
wrote in from
(195.92.nnn.nnn)
you know that wasnt editorial material it was in the supplement last week i read it.
here is another letter published in the same article.
Dear President Bush,
I'm sure you'll be having a nice little tea party with your fellow war criminal, Tony Blair. Please wash the cucumber sandwiches down with a glass of blood, with my compliments.
Harold Pinter
Playwright
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 11/22/2003 My Name Is.........Slim Shady
wrote in from
(63.164.nnn.nnn)
From the UK Guardian Editorial pages:
Dear Mr President,
Today you arrive in my country for the first state visit by an American president for many decades, and I bid you welcome.
You will find yourself assailed on every hand by some pretty pretentious characters collectively known as the British left. They traditionally believe they have a monopoly on morality and that your recent actions preclude you from the club. You opposed and destroyed the world's most blood-encrusted dictator. This is quite unforgivable.
I beg you to take no notice. The British left intermittently erupts like a pustule upon the buttock of a rather good country. Seventy years ago it opposed mobilisation against Adolf Hitler and worshipped the other genocide, Josef Stalin.
It has marched for Mao, Ho Chi Minh, Khrushchev, Brezhnev and Andropov. It has slobbered over Ceausescu and Mugabe. It has demonstrated against everything and everyone American for a century. Broadly speaking, it hates your country first, mine second.
Eleven years ago something dreadful happened. Maggie was ousted, Ronald retired, the Berlin wall fell and Gorby abolished communism. All the left's idols fell and its demons retired. For a decade there was nothing really to
hate. But thank the Lord for his limitless mercy. Now they can applaud Saddam, Bin Laden, Kim Jong-Il... and hate a God-fearing Texan. So hallelujah and have a good time.
Frederick Forsyth
Novelist
My Name Is.............
But you can call me Ray
Or You can call me Jay......
"the evidence is out there, you only have to look"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 11/22/2003 jonnyx
wrote in from
(195.92.nnn.nnn)
YOU are not a patch on churchill
whats your real name or do you have many?
10,000 protestors you say? even the police admit there were at least 12 times that many.
but as you dont have a real name we dont need to pay you any attention whatsoever
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 11/21/2003 Winston Churchill
wrote in from
(63.164.nnn.nnn)
Plan Assassinations ??????????????????
Damn , making threats online, especially of assassinating someone is going just a little to far!
Don’t you think ?
Apparently not…...
I just heard an interview with a British lady who’s son died recently in Iraq fighting the war on terrorism, She said nothing would bring her son back, and the grief she is going through is only a bit of what Iraqi mothers have gone through for many years, She begged for Bush, Blair and the rest of the allies to stay and finish the job.
She also said you shouldn't listen to a few radical Socialist Commie Leftist who think they speak for the UK as a whole.
I found it to be pretty funny that 10,000 people in a free country would stand in the street and protest in favor of terrorist like Osama Bin Laden and Saddam Hussien.
Also just heard about a free Michael Jackson Protest in London within the next couple weeks, do something useful and worthwhile of yourselves, show up and protest in favor of a child molester, it won’t make you look as dumb as you do protesting in favor of Killers.
The Nazi party was Socialist also. So were they good people?
The Chairman said that the purpose of Stop the War Coalition is not to stop ALL wars, just getting Bush and America OUT of Iraq and Afghanistan.
These people are COMMUNIST! And SOCIALIST! But not least the biggest bunch of Hate Monger Racist the world has ever known.
The list of who's on the Committee of Stop the War Coalition running this protest. The date of the list is 2001...
Mohammed Aslam Aijaz (London Council of Mosques), Sait Akgul (Federation of Kurdish Community Organisations in the UK), Tariq Ali (Broadcaster and Writer), Lois Austin (Socialist Party), Roger Bannister (UNISON NEC * and Socialist Party), Jim Brann (London Region CND Exec *), Andrew Burgin (Housmans Peace Bookshop), Graham Cee (Labour Left Briefing), Louise Christian (Lawyer), Jeremy Corbyn MP, Tekin Kartal Daymer (The Turkish / Kurdish community Centre), Laura Dubinsky (Fundraiser), George Galloway MP, Lindsey German (Editor, Socialist Review), Suresh Grover (National Civil Rights Movement), Stephanie Harrison (Campaign Against Criminalizing Communities), John Haylett (Editor, Morning Star), Mark Hoskisson (Workers Power), Soraya Lawrence (Lawyers Against the War), Fred Leplat (Branch Officer Islington Unison), Mike Marqusee (Media Workers Against the War), Andrew Murray (Communications Officer: ASLEF *), Chris Nineham (Globalise Resistance), John Rees (Socialist Workers Party), Bernard Regan (NUT Executive *), Asad Rehman (Newham Monitoring Group), Ratin Roy (SOAS: School of Oriental and African Studies), Carlos Rule (Socialist Labour Party), Tanja Salem Al-Awda (Campaign for Palestinian Rights), Helen Salmon (National Executive NUS *), Jane Shallice, Christine Shawcroft (Labour Against the War), Dr. Ghayasuddin Siddiqui (Muslim Parliament), Rae Street (Peace activist), Shahedah Vawda (Just Peace), Hilary Wainwright (Editor, Red Pepper), Wolf Wayne (Green Socialist Network and Socialist Alliance).
"the evidence is out there, you only have to look"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 11/21/2003 its not just bush you should be scared of
wrote in from
(195.92.nnn.nnn)
http://www.cnn.com/video/us/2002/02/25/ashcroft.sings.wbtv.med.html
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 11/21/2003 jonnyx
wrote in from
(195.92.nnn.nnn)
hi matt
you can read the war plan with its original justifications at www.newamericancentury.org
this was written long before 9-11
as for northern ireland, i couldnt agree with you more. it is however worthwile looking at how former "terrorists" have been brought back into the political fold through negotiation. if there is a military solution to terrorism then why didnt it work there in over 80 years? i know too many people whose lives have been wrecked by that conflict from both sides. a good friend of mine was a sniper in the paras on bloody sunday and though he did not fire a shot he was wracked with guilt to the day he died. he was also first on the scene of the abernethy cafe bombing, where a second bomb designed to kill security forces took his best friend. it was his 18th birthday. also my elder sisters boyfriend was killed in the bombing of harrods. thank god it appears to be over.
we do protest against tony, and we will vote against him, but we cannot vote against bush so we must protest/ridicule/chuck rocks/plan assasinations however we can.
can i be so bold as to suggest you all write to your congressman asking that the forthcoming auction be replaced with an election?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 11/21/2003 MissouriMatt
wrote in from
(128.206.nnn.nnn)
We're acting out of fear and anger with force. I'm sure there are a lot like myself that go back and forth on the war, but ultimately support it out of self preservation and bitterness towards terrorists in general. Maybe it's ill-conceived and bungling. But we're new to dealing with terror adn lashing out. I don't mind removing Sadam. I see it as an improvement for Iraq and the rest of the world. I feel deeply for those that are undertaking the task and they have my gratitude. I hope all that lose a loved one feel it was worth it. When is something worth dieing for? I wouldn't sign up myself, and from that standpoint, I guess I don't support the war at the ultimate level.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 11/21/2003
slalomsycophant
wrote in from
(64.203.nnn.nnn)
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?r=2&q=sycophant
A servile self-seeker who attempts to win favor by flattering influential people.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 11/21/2003
lacks MORL CURGE
wrote in from
(80.3.nnn.nnn)
"for those British against us"
Look. We're not against YOU. We love YOU.
It's your cretin-of-a-President -and his bungling ill-conceived foreign policies that we're against. Okay?
Love
The Chaps.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 11/21/2003 MissouriMatt
wrote in from
(128.206.nnn.nnn)
Uncle 66,
Your cartoon is really funny. Very well done.
All against the war,
I’ve been drawn in. I come to NCDSA to think about sk8ing and I’m thinking about war instead. Oh well. I’m glad I’m not actually fighting. I’m extremely thankful to be spending my evenings with my wife and kids, in a sheltered peace.
I’m not in favor of war, but peace has never been a realistic option. Are things being made better or worse? We can only guess, as we walk one path at a time. I hope things are being made better. I hope we are taking steps toward peace.
Democracy obviously does not equate to peace or justice, only that some citizens will have some say in policy. Most countries have a Monocracy, no matter what they call it. One dollar, one vote. While the US system is flawed, look at the balance of wealth in Iraq and tell me how well that Monocracy has worked. When all voices are heard and we have war, then that’s a day to cry. When only a few voices are heard and we have war, that’s a day to resist, protest, even go to war. So protest Bush. Lampoon him with humor. I think the US policy is geared toward establishing a voice of reason in the middle east. But it could all be about oil and revenge, too. I’m glad the British are “officially” with “us”, but for those Brits against us… well in my mind they should protest Tony not George. And as long as we are advocating getting out of countries, how about Northern Ireland?
God bless the soldiers and their families, and the families living without a voice. God bless the children living in fear and the children embracing violence to cope with their reality, in every country in the world.
Peace and Health to all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 11/21/2003 3 years alone
wrote in from
(195.92.nnn.nnn)
yup didnt that event actually happen BEFORE the US entered the war?
woooooooooh tinseltown becomes reality!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 11/21/2003 Norman D Landing
wrote in from
(195.92.nnn.nnn)
I saw the Film 'Enigma' evidently the British didnt have a Navy either.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 11/21/2003 here it is
wrote in from
(195.92.nnn.nnn)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pocket_battleship
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 11/21/2003 sarcastic bloke
wrote in from
(195.92.nnn.nnn)
of course germany is landlocked - thats why they used pocket battleships!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 11/21/2003 Sir Edward Knowitall
wrote in from
(204.126.nnn.nnn)
Winning a seat for dinner is not winning an election for Parliament or a municipal council, all though, it looks like the protest crowd that useally frequent the soup kitchen will be eating with silver instead of plastic tonight.
|
|
|
|
|
