I find it awfully ironic that we will render the UN irrelevant, but choose to use their resolutions as justification to invade another country.

The rest of the world believes they can resolve the Iraq problem peaceably. Iraq is not the only one violating UN resolutions. Iraq is not the only country that oppresses their people. Iraq is not the only country possessing WMD. Iraq is not the only country that has used WMD during war.

However, Iraq is the only country actively destroying weapons and the technology that give them the ability to make war.

The protests are concerned citizens looking for reasonable solutions.

No blanket statements. There are many people who protest with honorable intent. They are either anti-war, of any kind. or they dont think the case has been made for this war. I dont agree, but I respect their beliefs.

My point was that they are in the minority at these events and are being used. I have seen this up close and there is no doubt in my mind. I imagine some who post here were at the most recent marches and will post their own observations.

Did you all forget what thread you were in?

OK, I'm going to try this again, and see if I can phrase it in a way that doesn't provoke an excessive reaction.  The common stereotype is left/dove = communist, right/hawk = fascist.  Can we agree on that much?  The thing is, trying to use those stereotypes to claim that any particular person at a demonstration is supportive of the communist or fascist who might be next to them is utterly ridiculous.  People at rallies often find themselves temporarily on the same side of one issue as other people whose views on just about any other issue they abhor - witness feminists and religious conservatives united against pornography for another example.

That is all.  That is the point I was trying to make.  Does that count as a personal attack?

The people who were at those marches were toating anarcho-flags, socialist umbrellas and communist things

All of them? Every single last one of them? Well, then there's no "cover" at all, is there? No, for there to be cover there must be people who are not overtly communist or anarchist, but who are intentionally supporting those who are. What evidence is there of such a thing? What public admissions have been made that "I went to the rally to support my anarchist friends but deliberately tried to appear mainstream"? Still none? Why is the burden of proof being shoved onto those who should be presumed innocent, and not on their accusers?

BTW, could you give some examples of the symbols and slogans you interpret as "socialist" or "anarchist"? Something besides a peace symbol, or "give peace a chance"?

This is a lie? Undeclared Chemical Warheads Found

On the Iraqi's part it is!

Taken from the link you posted.

"We shall remain patient and we shall continue to deal with all this calmly," Mr. Amin said.
Mr. Amin said the inspection team found the munitions in a sealed box that had not been opened before and was covered by dust and bird droppings.
"When these boxes were opened, they found 122-mm rockets with empty warheads. No chemical or biological warheads. Just empty rockets which are expired and imported in 1988," Mr. Amin said, adding similar rockets were found by U.N. inspectors in 1997.

Doesn't sound like any smoking gun to me. Just misplaced rockets.

Officially, protest organizers are groups such as Not in Our Name & International A.N.S.W.E.R. , but the demonstration's sponsors have long histories of backing anti-government causes.

Not in Our Name is financed by the Interreligious Foundation for Community Organization, (I.F.C.O.), which is a million-dollar-a-year non-profit that supports Cuban dictator Fidel Castro and once sponsored a group headed by Sami Al-Arian — the University of South Florida professor being charged with fundraising for terrorist organizations Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad.

Okay..I found this article on Fox News.com that has to deal with the REAL topic of this thread

Anti-Government Boys pick up the tab

a worker in the Seattle field office acknowledged there are ties.

"There are some Workers World Party members in A.N.S.W.E.R.," said A.N.S.W.E.R. coordinator Jim McMahan.

As to my stance on un-American, we'll have to agree to disagree. I stand firm in my belief that when we are at war, it is un-American to publicly protest against our policy.

There are others. The marches serve as cover for radical elements that are committed to bringing this country down. Watch and see over the coming weeks. They also might provide cover for terror activity. This is not as far-fetched as you might think. They also put a huge strain on law enforcement, which is already stretched thin.

Musing:


You keep saying this, but this is not a self-evident truth. You've got to do better. Which "radical elements" are committed to "bringing this country down?" and exactly what, to you, does "bringing this country down" entail? So far, when pushed on this, you tend to retreat behind some vague implications of secrecy, and things you are not "at liberty" to reveal.

I can't help but think you are dodging this somehow, in an attempt to avoid using evidence. If you are some sort of undercover radical group infiltrator, I seriously doubt you would have the "slip" in discipline to post what you have posted in this thread, and then draw back and say, "oops, I probably shouldn't have gone that far..." One of the whole points of undercover work sort of entails not dropping thinly veiled hints about it all over the internet, I would think.

I'd say it's high time for you to cook or get out of the kitchen (to paraphrase a less savory statement). Give us some evidence, if you have it. Otherwise, you're just repeating the same unsupported opinion over and over.

I am reprinting much of Rosebraugh's rallying cry to his America-hating leftists so you know exactly what we are up against:

1) Attack the financial centers of the country. Using covert or black block techniques . . . physically shut down financial centers which regulate and assist the functioning of U.S. economy. This can be done in a variety of ways from massive property destruction, to online sabotage, to physical occupation of buildings.

2) Large scale urban rioting. With massive unrest and even state of emergencies declared in major cities across the country, the U.S. government will be forced to send U.S. troops into the domestic arena thereby taking resources and political focus away from the war.

3) Attack the media centers of the country. . . . Using any means necessary, shut down the national networks of NBC, ABC, CBS, CNN, etc. Not just occupations but actually engage in strategies and tactics which knock the networks off the air.

4) Spread the battle to the individuals responsible for the war and destruction of life -- the very heads of government and U.S. corporations. No longer should these people be able to hide behind their occupations, living their lives in peace while they simultaneously slaughter countless people. Hit them in their personal lives, visit their homes, and make them feel personally responsible for committing massive atrocities.

5) Make it known publicly that this movement DOES NOT support U.S. troops as long as they are serving an unjust and horrifying political regime. Create an atmosphere lacking of support to assist U.S. troops at home and abroad in losing their morale and will to fight. If you are supporting the troops you are supporting this war and the very U.S. government that is the primary terrorist regime in the international arena.

6) Actively target U.S. military establishments within the United States . . . use any means necessary to slow down the functioning of the murdering body.

7) When engaging in the above six activities, strike hard and fast and retreat in anonymity. . . . DO NOT GET CAUGHT. Do not get sent to jail. Stay alert, keep active, and keep fighting. Remember, an action is only good (especially at this juncture in U.S. society) if it will serve to severely disrupt the political system of the country, its economy, and the corporate interests that drive this society.

These green saboteurs aim to destroy our livelihoods and our military in the name of "peace." Our government must treat them as enemy combatants, not misguided imbeciles, and use any means necessary to stop them in their terrorist tracks.

Once again, can you prove that any of this is representative of the majority of protesters or protests? (And you should try diversifying your sources...)

Here's some more insight into the thinking of some of those on the streets while our troops are fighting to keep them safe.

click here

And as Andrew Sullivan often says, here's the money quote

Here's some more insight into the thinking of some of those on the streets while our troops are fighting to keep them safe.

The anarchists will be just one group using the 'anti-war' protest as a cover for their own sabotage. So will the communists, under a new name naturally.

I don't believe MusingfromtheMiddle ever stated it was a "majority" of the protestors.  Please correct me if I am wrong.