The World Can't Wait mass protest reminder

[senorpogo]

Add free beer and strippers and you might convince me to wear a commie shirt for a day.

I don't think I'd wear the hammer and sickle for any amount of beer. Though I did go to several young Democrats events because they had free beer, pretty good stuff too, I want to say Newcastle. I drank copious amounts and proceeded to get wrecked.

[Rob Lister]

Oh, for crying out loud. "Aerial surveillance satellites?"

I admit I missed that one.

[Pardalis]

Skeptigirl, I'm not quite sure I understand what is your plan to "drive out" the present administration.

Who exactly would be impeached? How long would it take? Who will take charge of the government during this process of impeachment and once the government is done?

[Darth Rotor]

I admit I missed that one.
I didn't see Pete Seger on the list of performers. Is he dead? This is right up his alley.

ETA: Roberto Maestas - Roberto Maestas is the Executive Director of El Centro de la Raza
Leader of a Hispanic racialist group. I'd put him in a class with David Duke.

DR

[AmateurScientist]

I don't know if Spike Lee is racist or not. I will observe that his depiction of Jewish business men (night club operators) in "Mo Bettah Blues" came across as a stereotype/caricature that smacked of Jesse Jackson's "Hymie town" meme.

DR

Actually I was alluding to a quote directly from Spike Lee's mouth in an interview he did with 60 Minutes or 20/20 years ago. He said very clearly that black persons could not by definition be racist, because according to his usage of "racist," being racist requires having the power to oppress minorities.

I haven't seen any of his movies, so I wouldn't know anything about his use of stereotyping.

AS

[AmateurScientist]

Oh, for crying out loud. "Aerial surveillance satellites?"

Wake up, Hagrok! Aren't you aware that Bush has a dedicated TV monitor in his bedroom tuned to your back yard?

That's right. Spy satellites didn't exist before Bush took office in 2001. No, the Cold War never happened.

AS

[Luke T.]

Betting the over on "won't."

DR

Maybe when someone at the protest approaches her to sign a petition demanding Bush to stop oppressing North Korea, she will wake up.

[andyandy]

I don't see anything in the following that suggests what some people here who don't know much except what they read on a few out of touch web sites are claiming.

at the risk of sounding repetitve, the only website that i've read with regards to WCW is their own. Please, please, please could you do the same?

Here - just click and read?

http://worldcantwait.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2160&Itemid=2

I appreciate that you're rather singled-handedly holding one side of the argument on this thread, but my questions from this post (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=1972449#post1972449) still remain unanswered....why support a movement with goals very different to your own? Why do you think that greater prominence for such a movement would be anything but a Republican spin-doctor's wetdream?

[mamapajamas]

I don't think I'd wear the hammer and sickle for any amount of beer. Though I did go to several young Democrats events because they had free beer, pretty good stuff too, I want to say Newcastle. I drank copious amounts and proceeded to get wrecked.


Oh, but you MUST wear the Che t-shirt offered by this blog:

http://no-pasaran.blogspot.com/

The Che shirt has the image shown in the blog's header graphic. I've got one of these, and I'm thinking about ordering the Marx one as well :).

[Darth Rotor]

Actually I was alluding to a quote directly from Spike Lee's mouth in an interview he did with 60 Minutes or 20/20 years ago. He said very clearly that black persons could not by definition be racist, because according to his usage of "racist," being racist requires having the power to oppress minorities.

I haven't seen any of his movies, so I wouldn't know anything about his use of stereotyping.

AS
Thanks. Sounds like typical black racialist apologia, a la Jackson, Sharpton, or Farrakhan on their less brilliant days.

Each of his films touches on racial issues, some with a heavy hand, some with a light touch. I think his first was "School Daze" or "She's Gotta Have It." "Do The Right Thing" was a decent flick. Most of his other stuff a bit heavy handed. What I like is that his story telling voice is different from the standard Hollywood fare, whatever his talents and flaws as a story teller.

His latest political tripe on Monday Night Football was disgusting, as was Mike Tirico's application of his lips to Lee's buttocks on the air.

DR

[andyandy]

Skeptigirl, I'm not quite sure I understand what is your plan to "drive out" the present administration.

Who exactly would be impeached? How long would it take? Who will take charge of the government during this process of impeachment and once the government is done?

pah! You want details? They seem to stop just after the we all hate Bush part......

[Darth Rotor]

Wake up, Hagrok! Aren't you aware that Bush has a dedicated TV monitor in his bedroom tuned to your back yard?
What say we all runover to Hagrok's back yard and moon the satellite camera?
That's right. Spy satellites didn't exist before Bush took office in 2001. No, the Cold War never happened. AS
Then why was I wearing that bridge coat? :p

DR

[Hagrok]

I admit I missed that one.
It's pretty much a gross misunderstanding of satellite technology.

[mamapajamas]

To be cliche' here, The World Can't Wait two more years. At the very least we need to stop the rubber stamping of these horrendous decisions.

Uh... with the complex charges outlined on the WCW webpage, it would take AT LEAST two years just to work through them on the prosecution side.

I think this organization knows that.

Impeaching Bush before he leaves office is not a reasonable expectation at this point in time.

[marksman]

The goal is not to impeach Bush, but to garner donations from people who think such a thing is accomplishable.

[mamapajamas]

The goal is not to impeach Bush, but to garner donations from people who think such a thing is accomplishable.

Bingo. And since it isn't possible to impeach Bush before he leaves office, the money would be routed to "other causes". Like representing terrorists in court (lest anyone ignore the fact or conveniently "forget" it, Lynne Stewart is the legal advisor of the organization).

[Foolmewunz]

Skeptigirl,
Either you won't do your research or you don't care enough.
Saving Andyandy a few keystrokes, I'll ask you again to reply to my questions in this post http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=1972953#post1972953

Further, are you really so young or naive as to say that you've never heard anyone in the catholic church associated with Communism? Just to pick one of your more absurd comments.

I'm not going to go into details here but I have considerably more bona fides than you with the CP, WoW, Fourth Int'l, et al. I had a rather different childhood than most, to say the least. I am not pretending to be Lauro Chavez, here, but if you knew anything about the radical left and its history, you'd see through this "big tent" they're throwing out.

I am absolutely with Luke T on this. If the Man/Boy Love crowd threw a demonstration to support free speech, I'd stay at home. I'd defend their right to have their demonstration, but I'd also perhaps be down there to tell sweet little old ladies not to give their money to a group of paedophiles.

I'm truly beginning to lean towards the thought that you're either an RCP shill or you're their ideal convert to the cause. You're doing exactly as Azakian has espoused.

[BPSCG]

Oh, but you MUST wear the Che t-shirt offered by this blog:Hey, skeptigirl, if you see this shirt (http://www.thoseshirts.com/images/model-reagan-k.jpg), could you pick up one for me (size M)?

And if you see the girl who's modelling it in the link, could you get me her phone number? I think we could get to be good friends.

[RandFan]

:rolleyes: More cut and paste skeptigirl? You haven't figured it out yet?

[mamapajamas]

Don't take my word for it...

Please rest assured that we didn't.

[AmateurScientist]

Bump for Skeptigirl.

ICW. I Can't Wait to hear her first hand account of today's eagerly anticipated festivities. I expect that by the end of the day, PST, Bush the Destroyer of All Things Good in the World, including Communist Kittens, will no longer be in office. I suspect that we will all be wearing matching khaki or olive drab fatigues with nice buttons and maybe red trim on the collars or something, and carrying signs of our New Leader's benevolent face. All hail the New Leader, whomever she may be.

Skeptigirl, is there something you haven't been telling us? Is it you?

AS

[Foolmewunz]

Bump for Skeptigirl.

ICW. I Can't Wait to hear her first hand account of today's eagerly anticipated festivities. I expect that by the end of the day, PST, Bush the Destroyer of All Things Good in the World, including Communist Kittens, will no longer be in office. I suspect that we will all be wearing matching khaki or olive drab fatigues with nice buttons and maybe red trim on the collars or something, and carrying signs of our New Leader's benevolent face. All hail the New Leader, whomever she may be.

Skeptigirl, is there something you haven't been telling us? Is it you?

AS

Well, don't count on her running into any Trotskyites. While they haven't cleaned off their "in praise of Azakian" references from their site, they have been posting behavioral modification therapy to tell people to not be rowdies this year. Evidently they didn't like the coverage from San Francisco last year. So they're trying to put a warmer face on this year's events. I expect a non-event. No one gets arrested, no one gets any press (outside of "vanity press" type coverage in their own house organs)... more important, though.... Nobody's walking out of work. There's squabbling in the "movement", and a couple of other umbrella feelgood organizations have declared they won't take part because they fear the lack of reaction would be a win for Bushies; e.g. when no one walks off the job.....

I'll now wait for the glorious stories from the battlefront...... I do so hope they change the world. I've got an old Mao jacket somewhere in storage...

[AmateurScientist]

I do so hope they change the world.

I'd like to buy the world a Coke
And keep it company.

It's the Real Thing.

AS

ETA: http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/ccmphtml/colaadv.html

[Darth Rotor]

I suspect that we will all be wearing matching khaki or olive drab fatigues with nice buttons and maybe red trim on the collars or something, and carrying signs of our New Leader's benevolent face. All hail the New Leader, whomever she may be.

She would be Madonna, but she couldn't make the rally due to a money making deal elsewhere. :p

I think I have an old beret in a box somewhere that I could contribute to the fashionista effort: a girl scout beret my daughter once wore.

"Sometimes, Anna, a beret is just a beret."

DR

[AmateurScientist]

My office is smack dab in the middle of downtown, a block from the courthouse square, which is usually where protests take place here, and I've yet to see any person from WCW. It's almost noon now. I won't be holding my breath.

Anybody else see these people in your city or town?

AS

[BPSCG]

My office is smack dab in the middle of downtown, a block from the courthouse square, which is usually where protests take place here, and I've yet to see any person from WCW. It's almost noon now. I won't be holding my breath.

Anybody else see these people in your city or town?

ASThey're suppposed to be in downtown DC today at Lafayette Park, but I'm working from home today, so I won't be able to pop out there with a camera, wearing a dark suit, sunglasses, carrying a cell phone and a clip board. Pity - I like to poke at them through the bars in their cages, make them snarl...

[Dragonrock]

I work at a university, you know, those bastions of open-minded liberalism. On my way back from lunch I saw that the university square was just as empty as always.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

I was going to attend this protest today, but then I remembered that I have a job.

[BPSCG]

Washington Post's website is continuously updated. I hit their search engine for both "World Can't Wait" and "Lafayette Park" a few minutes ago. Zip on the former, September 18 was the last hit on the latter.

I'm sure there were a few dozen people marching around with banners and such, but since Lafayette Park is right across the street from the White House, that's about as unusual a sight as snow in Alaska in February.
Some chronic protestors practically live in Lafayette Park.

[AmateurScientist]

Well, for a mainstream movement and protest, these guys sure are keeping a low profile. Maybe they intend to overthrow the government by stealth.

AS

[Darth Rotor]

Maybe they intend to overthrow the government by stealth. AS
Didn't that work for Lenin? His final attempt at revolution involved quite a bit of secrecy.

*check for WCW'ers in local woodpile*

DR

[Huntster]

Yes indeed, as there are many dictatorships around the world but only the one's with large amounts of oil ever get invaded.

Would you be happier if they all got invaded?

[Huntster]

Grown up or not, a size 14 Reebok in the sack is equals social justice in this town, so God help any of these goat-chasers if they slow my commute by as much as thirty f**king seconds on 10/5.

Traffic was smooth this morning. No goat-ropers around here.

[andyandy]

any news on the coup? No sign of a general strike on BBC.....or is the mass walkout scheduled for 5pm? :)

[AmateurScientist]

Worst. Coup. Ever.

AS

[Darth Rotor]

Worst. Coup. Ever.

AS
Are you referring to the Corvair? ;)

Oh, wait, coup, not coupe. :boggled:

DR

[Luke T.]

Small turnout in Seattle:

About 150 demonstrators against the Iraq War gathered Thursday morning on the University of Washington campus in Seattle in Red Square.

They then marched to a rally Thursday afternoon in the Capitol Hill neighborhood, before planning to march to an all-night sit-in outside the Federal Building in downtown Seattle.


http://www.komotv.com/stories/45826.htm

150.

[Dragonrock]

There were more people than that at my boss' BBQ party.

[Darth Rotor]

Small turnout in Seattle:



http://www.komotv.com/stories/45826.htm

150.
By using a narrow enough field of view, a camera man can present the impression of an immense mob with that many people. First time I saw evidence of this was two different camera angles of a protest in Haiti, 1994.

DR

[Luke T.]

By using a narrow enough field of view, a camera man can present the impression of an immense mob with that many people. First time I saw evidence of this was two different camera angles of a protest in Haiti, 1994.

DR

That was one of the first tricks I was taught when I went to a political campaign training seminar in the 70s.

Google "World Can't Wait" in the images section and you can see that trick at work.

[Luke T.]

Looks like they couldn't fill up a parking lot in San Francisco last November.

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/108645257c5fdf513.jpg

[marksman]

Looks like the world can wait, after all.

[Pardalis]

I guess it will have to wait, I still don't have a clue of what their "plan" to overthrow the government is.

:confused:

[Darth Rotor]

I guess it will have to wait, I still don't have a clue of what their "plan" to overthrow the government is.
Hold their collective breath until they turn blue, from red.

DR

[senorpogo]

I guess it will have to wait, I still don't have a clue of what their "plan" to overthrow the government is.

:confused:

How come I keep thinking of that one South Park?

"Oh man, I can't wait to see the look on those little Eichmanns' faces when they hear this crunchy groove."

[Rob Lister]

Oh.stop.it

It's still in progress in most places. Heck, most of the sites were on the Left Coast so there's still daylight to march, plus, there are the after-protest orgies to attend. ONLY then can they write-up their sit-reports to convey the actual success they had but which the Corporate/Government Controlled Media
TOTALLY
SUPPRESSED!

I assure you all it was a complete and utter success, no matter the actual utter lack of participation.

[Pardalis]

I guess they all went back home and rented "V for Vendetta"... :rolleyes:

[Darth Rotor]

Oh.stop.it

It's still in progress in most places. Heck, most of the sites were on the Left Coast so there's still daylight to march, plus, there are the after-protest orgies to attend. ONLY then can they write-up their sit-reports to convey the actual success they had but which the Corporate/Government Controlled Media
TOTALLY
SUPPRESSED!

I assure you all it was a complete and utter success, no matter the actual utter lack of participation.
They film the orgies, or just the protests?

DR

[gtc]

I assume one of the objections of persons here who think every social program is a step toward communism

Which people think that?

(an absurd conclusion, BTW),

It would be an absurd conclusion, if people made such a conclusion

is in using tax dollars for social causes.

Why do you make that assumption?

Always so nice to chat with intellectuals.

As soon as you insult people you lose the moral high ground.

[Badger]

They film the orgies, or just the protests?

DR

Dude, take another look at the pictures on their sites. Do you you WANT to see that orgy?

[gtc]

Anyone get any photos of the rallies? These are apparently photos from the Ohio rally.

Feel the mainstream!

WCW Ohio (http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/pictures/WCW-Columbus/)

By the way, "Skeeza" means "whore" according to urban dictionary.

Here is an article from a Village Voice reporter about the influence of the RCP in the WCW
at NYC Indymedia (http://nyc.indymedia.org/en/2006/10/76908.html).

I corrected the link. I didn't know we could edit our posts after someone replies.

[WildCat]

Anyone get any photos of the rallies? These are apparently photos from the Ohio rally.

Feel the mainstream!

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/pictures/WCW-Columbus/?imgIndex=2&autoShow=6 (http://Ohio WCW)

By the way, "Skeeza" means "whore" according to urban dictionary..
LGF bashing in 5...4...3...2...1...

But the link doesn't work!

[Pardalis]

I'd like to apologize to Skeptigirl, I've thought about it more (with my head cooled down) and I think we owe some respect to Skeptigirl. I think she has very good intentions and that her heart is in the right place. Also, she has every right and reason to be mad at the Bush administration.

I think individually, most of the common people in WCW are like Skeptigirl, nice people who are fed up with their government. They got caught up in this absurd movement because they think they're doing what's right, and I think they are doing the right thing, in a way. If you're not happy with your government, the best thing to do is to at least try and do something about it. It's their utlimate right, as Americans and as citizens of a free and democratic World. Even though what she says of their plan doesn't make sense to me, I think we should applaude her for stepping up. At least, that's a heck of a lot more than what the Democrats are doing.

But on the other hand, I think the WCW movement is misguiding them. From what I scarsely know of them, they are manipulating their members. They are letting their hatred of Bush and their feeling of powerlessness blind their judgement. Actually, they are betting on it. The members seem more like followers to me, repeating the same words and phrases over and over. Does this reminds you of anything?... That's exactly like what cults do. They are playing on people's emotions, fueling their anger towards Bush by demonizing him and they incite fear by using absurd Nazi comparisons, which I think is extremely dishonest, and manipulative. That's where I draw the line. You can protest, but don't lie and manipulate the facts.

Skeptigirl, you say you are surprised of people of this board being sarcastic about this movement, you say people here are supposed to be skeptics and critical thinkers, I think you should be yourself skeptical of your WCW movement. Quite frankly, nobody will ever get anywhere comparing anyone to Hitler, it's the biggest fallacy you can make. Even Bush is doing it... :rolleyes:

[RandFan]

12:01 Turn out the lights. Whatever it was is over. I guess the revolution was postponed.

:s2:

[a_unique_person]

I'd like to apologize to Skeptigirl, I've thought about it more (with my head cooled down) and I think we owe some respect to Skeptigirl. I think she has very good intentions and that her heart is in the right place. Also, she has every right and reason to be mad at the Bush administration.



Good.

[AmateurScientist]

Good.

Not exactly surprising to see your extreme leftist two cents here, AUP.

Methinks perhaps it is Skeptigirl who might owe a few apologies. A little contrition might be in order, especially after the OP and its presumptuous premise, oh and then nearly everything else that followed from her, including lots of gratuitous insults aimed at no one in particular, but with the general intent that they applied to everyone who disagreed with her.

Not very skeptical, and not very nice either.

Go ahead and accuse me of being the pot calling the kettle black and all that, AUP, I know you want to.

AS

[DaChew]

I drifted off. Was anybody hurt? Who's President?

Oh. Nothing happened. Oh well, should be some interesting photos to go through.

I see hippies don't age well. Didn't think they would.

OK, someone want to take a stab at explaining the sign in the lower right? "The movement is in my pants"

[AmateurScientist]

Right or wrong many believed that deposing Saddam and installing a democracy could bring stability and a seachange to the Mideast. Now you can argue that the idea was wrong headed and was doomed to failure as George H. W. Bush argued following Gulf War I but it is stall A reason.

You need to think a little harder.

I just noticed this, I think.

I agree that Cheezoff needs to think a little harder. There are strategic reasons, long term and short term, that would have justified the war militarily. Nevermind peaceniks who believe that war is never justified.

Deposing Saddam to bring about stability in the Middle East, and to stop the genocide of the Kurds and to bring an end to his reign of terror over his country are good enough reasons, in my book. Of course, those who argued we would end up in a quagmire a la Vietnam are half-right. It is a quagmire, but for different reasons than Vietnam.

Anyway, this summer Glenn Beck suggested another strategic reason for invading Iraq. He admits that his notion is just speculation, postulation, and what scientists often call a WAG -- Wild Assed Guess. He suggests that perhaps the real reason we invaded Iraq was to establish a large military presence right next door to Iran, who is the real threat to the national security of the US in the Middle East. Beck suggests that it is possible that the Bush Administration had to keep that real reason secret for national security, and that the numerous reasons offered to the public were merely diversions, albeit ones that the public didn't swallow after the press starting rooting around after the invasion failed to yield any firm evidence of WMDs, etc.

Mind you I don't necessarily believe Beck's theory is correct, but it does show some thinking, and it is at least plausible. The peacenik knee-jerk "never justified" is simply unrealistic and would never have resulted in the US' defending itself, much less the interests of our allies around the world, most notably Western Europe in the first two world wars.

AS

[a_unique_person]

Not exactly surprising to see your extreme leftist two cents here, AUP.

Methinks perhaps it is Skeptigirl who might owe a few apologies. A little contrition might be in order, especially after the OP and its presumptuous premise, oh and then nearly everything else that followed from her, including lots of gratuitous insults aimed at no one in particular, but with the general intent that they applied to everyone who disagreed with her.

Not very skeptical, and not very nice either.

Go ahead and accuse me of being the pot calling the kettle black and all that, AUP, I know you want to.

AS


For cryin out loud, I am a moderate here.

[Foolmewunz]

Pardalis, I don't know that you really need to apologize to SG. I have nothing against her motives, per se, if they are as you surmise, but we asked her to clarify over and over, yet she wouldn't. Repeated postings of all the foreground material never indicated whether she actually knew or cared what the background of the organization is. She did actually post this:


Regarding the idea behind the World Can't Wait. I think you are mostly all mistaken about the plan but I will take your skepticism into account and look a bit closer, not just at the organizers, but about who will be attending and what the majority's motives are.

There are many people who are indeed too radical for reality. On the one hand it is a mistake that results in people turning away from the real issue, such as all or at least almost all the comments in this thread (haven't read them all yet) indicate has occurred. But on the other hand, it is often those who are over the line who are motivated enough to initiate action. Whether it is effective action will remain to be seen.

But then she proceeded to post as though she either did not research the organizers and WCW, or decided that they were "okay, 'cuz they're just interested in peace and getting the shrubbery out of the White House".


Demonstrating for your beliefs is as American as apple pie, and so is asking people why they're doing so. (Same as in Canada, btw.... I lived in Montreal for 10 years.) We just asked repeatedly if SG knew who she was supporting. WCW is not a broad coalition, although they try to be. They couldn't get support from other Anti-war groups for this because last November they were pretty well outed as a front for the RCP. This year, they seem to have limited the speakers to a token communist here and there, attempting to downplay the rhetoric and the molotov cocktail from last year.

Wanna bet they go back to a little more radical stance? They got almost no attention. Read the statement that they prepared to be read at the events today. They thought they'd be addressing thousands. It's on their site. Is it just me or does the text seem to have natural pauses while they wait for the wild cheering to die down?

[Luke T.]

Well, it was estimated that 800 people, mostly of college age, showed up at the WCW protest where I live.

At some point, about 50 of them broke off the route they had gotten a permit for, and decided to head for the highway to shut down traffic.

The police stepped in and stopped them, arresting at least 10 of them.

[a_unique_person]

Anyone get any photos of the rallies? These are apparently photos from the Ohio rally.

Feel the mainstream!

WCW Ohio (http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/pictures/WCW-Columbus/)

By the way, "Skeeza" means "whore" according to urban dictionary.

Here is an article from a Village Voice reporter about the influence of the RCP in the WCW
at NYC Indymedia (http://nyc.indymedia.org/en/2006/10/76908.html).

I corrected the link. I didn't know we could edit our posts after someone replies.

He says WCW is, but he doesn't say why he believes it is so.

[Darth Rotor]

Dude, take another look at the pictures on their sites. Do you you WANT to see that orgy?
The horror, the horror! :eye-poppi

Good point.

From the Village Voice article:
. . . indeed, the RCP folks are against voting.
. . . this appears to be another exercise in group venting, with the hope that if enough different players with divergent mindsets unite in their opposition to Bush, it will magically "repolarize" the country.
I hear that train a comin' . . . Woooo Wooooooooo!

DR

[Dragonrock]

OK, someone want to take a stab at explaining the sign in the lower right? "The movement is in my pants"

It means Phil is a member of WCW.

[Ziggurat]

OK, someone want to take a stab at explaining the sign in the lower right? "The movement is in my pants"

My guess? He had a bowel movement. I guess he really couldn't wait. Maybe he's campaigning for more public toilets or something.

[a_unique_person]

The horror, the horror! :eye-poppi

Good point.

From the Village Voice article:

I hear that train a comin' . . . Woooo Wooooooooo!

DR

The country is changing it's mind. WCW or not, the Republicans are on the nose.

[MRegan]

The country is changing it's mind. WCW or not, the Republicans are on the nose.

I remember hearing this two years ago as well. In about 30 days we will know for sure.

[Luke T.]

The country is changing it's mind. WCW or not, the Republicans are on the nose.

The WCW is not about replacing Republicans with Democrats or vice versa.

[Darth Rotor]

The country is changing it's mind. WCW or not, the Republicans are on the nose.
"This country" doesn't know its own mind, if it has one in a collective sense.

There is no "will of the people" in America. There is occasionally an exercise in the will of some of the people, at ballot boxes. "The people" are most certainly not United. The formal agreements between the several states unite those disembodied political entities.

Keep trying to spray moonshine on a wall, AUP, it won't stick.

What does it mean that "the Republicans are on the nose?" I am unfamiliar with that expression.

DR

[BPSCG]

Okay, the Washington Post had coverage today, as part of an AP feed (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/05/AR2006100501676.html):
Hundreds of people called the Bush administration's policies a crime and held up yellow police tape in front of the White House on Thursday amid a nationwide day of protest against the president.Not exactly Louis Farrakhan's "million man march," was it? You could probably get "hundreds of people" to march in favor of strangling puppies in this town.


"We are turning the corner in bringing forward a mass movement of resistance to drive out the Bush regime," said organizer Travis Morales with the activist group World Can't Wait.
Yup. Turning the corner. I predict the illegitimate Bush regime will be driven from power in just another 108 weeks.

[Pardalis]

Good.

Not exactly surprising to see your extreme leftist two cents here, AUP.

For cryin out loud, I am a moderate here.

In defense of AUP, he only said one word, "good". How can this be "extreme"?

[Pardalis]

Pardalis, I don't know that you really need to apologize to SG. I have nothing against her motives, per se, if they are as you surmise, but we asked her to clarify over and over, yet she wouldn't.

I agree, she hasn't really answered any questions so far, including mine. I don't know why she is avoiding them.

I just felt bad that this discussion was getting a little too one-sided against her. Since there is no other "leftist" except AUP that has come to take her defense, I thought I'd at least give her credit for standing for what she believes in.

[DaChew]

I agree, she hasn't really answered any questions so far, including mine. I don't know why she is avoiding them.

I just felt bad that this discussion was getting a little too one-sided against her. Since there is no other "leftist" except AUP that has come to take her defense, I thought I'd at least give her credit for standing for what she believes in.

Not that I'm accusing anyone of anything but not only hasn't she really answered any questions, she also seems to have stopped posting entirely in this thread now that the march is over. Were I the cynical sort, I might think that all that she was doing in this thread was promoting the event and not really thinking of engaging in any sort of debate about its merits - real or imagined. For all I know, she may have been entirely uninterested in examining the organizers of the event or their public record.

I certainly hope she returns to this thread and answers some the questions posed to her. I would hate for people here, some of whom are very quick to judge others as we all know, to conclude anything negative about her intentions.

[andyandy]

I agree, she hasn't really answered any questions so far, including mine. I don't know why she is avoiding them.

I just felt bad that this discussion was getting a little too one-sided against her. Since there is no other "leftist" except AUP that has come to take her defense, I thought I'd at least give her credit for standing for what she believes in.

The one sided nature of the thread is because the WCW movement's ideology alienates both the moderate left and the right.....it's always going to get pounded from both sides....

[Garrette]

The one sided nature of the thread is because the WCW movement's ideology alienates both the moderate left and the right.....it's always going to get pounded from both sides....If I hadn't seen the earlier linked photos of some of the members, I'd make a joke about the post-protest orgies...

[Darth Rotor]

The one sided nature of the thread is because the WCW movement's ideology alienates both the moderate left and the right.....it's always going to get pounded from both sides.... If I hadn't seen the earlier linked photos of some of the members, I'd make a joke about the post-protest orgies...
. . . an airtight post.

My read: Skeptigabber was engagning in viral marketing, for one, and in a failed attempt to rally support around her red, hammer and sickle emblazoned banner, the one she thought was decorated with a croissant and a meat tenderizer, which latter image lends weight to the entire thread being an exercise in self abuse. :cool:

DR

[AmateurScientist]

In defense of AUP, he only said one word, "good". How can this be "extreme"?

I'm not referring to his post, but rather his past viewpoints he has expressed. I find it amusing that AUP thinks he's moderate, and I was trying to say that I'm not surprised to see him mounting a mild defense of Skeptigirl here.

AS

[Darth Rotor]

I find it amusing that AUP thinks he's moderate, and I was trying to say that I'm not surprised to see him mounting . . . Skeptigirl here.
Evidence? Pictures? :jaw-dropp On second thought, better not.

*ducks*

DR

[RandFan]

For cryin out loud, I am a moderate here.Yeah, everyone's a moderate.

[RandFan]

"This country" doesn't know its own mind, if it has one in a collective sense.

There is no "will of the people" in America. There is occasionally an exercise in the will of some of the people, at ballot boxes. "The people" are most certainly not United. The formal agreements between the several states unite those disembodied political entities. Thank you. I couldn't have said it better.

[BPSCG]

Yeah, everyone's a moderate.Me too! :D

[Dragonrock]

Except Tricky, he's an extreme moderate.

[RandFan]

"This country" doesn't know its own mind, if it has one in a collective sense.

There is no "will of the people" in America. There is occasionally an exercise in the will of some of the people, at ballot boxes. "The people" are most certainly not United. The formal agreements between the several states unite those disembodied political entities. Thank you. I couldn't have said it better.

[BPSCG]

Thank you. I couldn't have said it better.I would have said it moderately better.

[RandFan]

Moderates of JREF unite! We could change the world. Think about it. Now I'm going to have a rum and coke and veg out behind the computer because it's Friday and it's 5 O'Clock somewhere and I CAN'T WAIT!

[gtc]

He says WCW is, but he doesn't say why he believes it is so.

Sorry, I didn't understand that. Which 'he' are you referring to.

[WildCat]

Apparently Chicago can wait. The protestors claimed 10,000 people would attend, but apparently 8,500 of them decided to stay home.

[Foolmewunz]

Apparently, Skeptigirl feels that she has nothing more to say on the subject.
I found this in another thread in response to something else. Obviously here googleresearch leads her to believe the surface articles, and that she's done arguing with us pig-headed folks!

WCW is not what most people who replied in my thread on it claim. I refuted their claims showing the fallacies in their links and arguments but can't keep answering the pages of ad homs and other nonsense.

To be accused of sucking up propaganda is laughable. I doubt many of the members making claims like that even know what real propaganda is.

I suppose making such an incendiary accusation in this thread would have been ill-advised. I still believe she is legitimate. She just doesn't want to bother finding out the the boogie man is the sponsor of her pet cause. The old 'enemy of my enemy is my friend' syndrome.

Sorry, Skeptigirl. You didn't refute any claims. You posted to mainstream press articles on the sister organizations and speakers and such. You actually linked to RCP's site, commenting something like "big deal - they have and ad for WCW there". Well, take a look at their column they wrote 10/4 on the subject of the activities on Oct 5. They barely mention WCW becase THEIR READERS know that RCP is WCW.

It's easy for Skeptigirl to dismiss this criticisms here, because, after all, we're all right wing nut jobs. She's normally logical and skeptical in most threads (if wordy), but wears her heart on her sleeve when if comes to Bush, and like I said - the enemy of my enemy is my friend. Politics does make strange bedfellows.

WCW will likely fade into oblivion. They had planning sessions and school sessions planned for the mid and end of this month, no doubt to ride the crest of this swelling wave of protest. I doubt that anyone will hear much of them for a while. The serious Anti-Bush effort is working on the mid-term elections.

[Darth Rotor]

It's easy for Skeptigirl to dismiss this criticisms here, because, after all,
. . . she's an airhead who has been used by Commies as yet another useful idiot.

I wish she and her zucchini a long and happy life together.

DR

[RandFan]

. . . she's an airhead who has been used by Commies as yet another useful idiot.

I wish she and her zucchini a long and happy life together.

DR I find that inapropriate. Odd but I also agree.

[Pardalis]

Skeptigirl, were there any 9/11 conspiracy theorists at your rally?

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=65438

:rolleyes:

Come on Skeptigirl, how can you even affiliate yourself with these idiots?

[Skeptic Ginger]

You can read my comments here (http://www.skepticfriends.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=6815&whichpage=4). Luke brought his comments there. I see no point in posting twice. If you think your comments are important enough, then register and post there. I reply to most threads there.

Having to go out of your way to repeat your comments will filter out some of the chaff.

It's a pretty straight forward forum. If you try your asinine comments there, others will ask you to support your conclusions.

[RandFan]

It's a pretty straight forward forum. If you try your asinine comments there, others will ask you to support your conclusions. OH give us a break. It's a pretty straight forward forum here. Whey you tried your asinine comments here we asked you to support your conclusions. We're still waiting.

[LashL]

It appears that the world can wait, after all.

[gtc]

You can read my comments here (http://www.skepticfriends.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=6815&whichpage=4). Luke brought his comments there. I see no point in posting twice. If you think your comments are important enough, then register and post there. I reply to most threads there.

Having to go out of your way to repeat your comments will filter out some of the chaff.

It's a pretty straight forward forum. If you try your asinine comments there, others will ask you to support your conclusions.

Skeptigirl, I have repeated my comments several times. I suspect they are pretty chaff free.

Why did you think that we would not be skeptical about the aims of the WCW rally?

Why did you not think that we would not be skeptical about the ability of the WCW rally to achieve its aims?

Why did it not concern you that the stated aims of the WCW rally amounts to the overthrow of the current presidency AND the overthrow of the established constitution of the USA?

Why, if you both think that problem is that Bush is undermining democracy (however nebulous that concept might be) would you think that overthrowing democracy would be the solution?

Why do you think that attending a rally that was a couple of thousand strong across the US will make a difference, when Bush already knows that millions of people voted against him (so it is not like he needs to be reminded that he is not the most popular person in the US)?

The WCW thinks that this protest will be the start of a mass movement that will lead to people boycotting work and school and shutting down the nation until Bush is forced out (like what they think happened in Bolivia). Do you think that would happen?

The RCP (who is heavilly involved in organising the WCW rally) thinks that the next step will be a Maoist revolution. Do you think this is likely? Did it not concern you that the RCP is heavily involved in organising the WCW rallies? If not, why not?

You have said that while the RCP has been involved, they are not the only ones involved. Which mainstream organisations were involved?

Everything I have read has pointed to the WCW being heavily criticised on several fronts. Firstly, the Right thinks it is useless or (obviously) disagrees with getting rid of Bush. The Democrats don't like it, because it gives the left a bad name (sometimes Molotovs will do that) and because the WCW and the RCP are as against the Democrats as much as they are against the Republicans. Many activists (see Village Voice article or NY Indymedia) are against the WCW because of the molotovs and because they disagree with the aims of the RCP. You have dismissed these concerns and implied there was some kind of conspiracy (if I read your comments correctly). On what basis have you dismissed these concerns?

Did you actually attend the rally?

How many others were there?

Do you think it was succesful?

Obviously there are a lot of questions here. Feel free to be selective in your responses. I don't want you to feel like you are facing a barage of questions, although I am genuinely interested in the answers to each and every question.

[Foolmewunz]

You can read my comments here (http://www.skepticfriends.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=6815&whichpage=4). Luke brought his comments there. I see no point in posting twice. If you think your comments are important enough, then register and post there. I reply to most threads there.

Having to go out of your way to repeat your comments will filter out some of the chaff.

It's a pretty straight forward forum. If you try your asinine comments there, others will ask you to support your conclusions.

Luke's doing a yeoman's job over there. Do you only want to play to your own peanut gallery? If Luke can take being bombarded by multiple posters, and answering any and all questions, why were you unable to do so, here?

Your and SN's assumption that the board here is all Bush-Babies is totally wrong. Luke already said that, and it bears repeating. But that's not his issue at all, yet five pages of SN thread keep ignoring his concern (or more specifically YOU do... some of the others seem to get it). Luke's and my own and several others' question is why you would elect NOT to research the umbrella group under which you're marching.

No. Don't show any more links to warm kitten-loving speakers. Do the digging that you would do if this was a purported "Million Housewife March" and you had good reason to suspect that it was really sponsored by the "Friends of Mussolini Society".

I'm going to take a guess that Luke and Randfan (just two pick two names of folks who don't hesitate to state their position) and I are pretty far apart, politically. It doesn't stop us from asking why you let your googling skills cease on the front pages and don't go any deeper. ANSWER is a front for WOWP. WCW is a front for RCP. They are both Stalinist/Maoist. They both openly discuss how they're trying to co-opt the peace and anti-Bush sentiments. And, they both bemoan the loss of the movement in the 50's in Russia and '76 in China! Those are the dates of the demise of Stalin and Mao, respectively and when their revolutionary ideologies went into decline.

Why is it that this information is so easy to find for many of us, yet you can't locate it?

[senorpogo]

You can read my comments here (http://www.skepticfriends.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=6815&whichpage=4). Luke brought his comments there. I see no point in posting twice. If you think your comments are important enough, then register and post there. I reply to most threads there.

You see no point in posting twice? Why didn't you feel this way to begin with? Why did you feel the need to spam this message board with your WCW nonsense in the first place?

[Tailgater]

You can read my comments here (http://www.skepticfriends.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=6815&whichpage=4). Luke brought his comments there. I see no point in posting twice. If you think your comments are important enough, then register and post there. I reply to most threads there.

Having to go out of your way to repeat your comments will filter out some of the chaff.

It's a pretty straight forward forum. If you try your asinine comments there, others will ask you to support your conclusions.

Straight forward? That forum is pathetic. Luke is doing a great job, but I'm not sure why he's bothering. Once you hear them talk about fixed elections and excuses for Stalin, it's about as pointless as the OP. I guess you find good company with people that repeat everything you do. Go check out the CT forum here and you might find more who agree with you just like them. Be careful though.....Bush is watching.:eek:

As far as calling JREF members right wingers, I would post the same statement if a "right winger" was posting nonsense if Kerry won the election and was calling the election fixed and the media "controlled by the liberals". I wouldn't show up to a pro-war rally if it was founded by nazis and justify it by saying we share a common goal.

[marksman]

Yes, when Clinton was President I was often called a left-winger because I refused to believe he was the secret manipulator behind the murder of Vince Foster, that I refused to believe that he arranged to have Ron Brown's plane crash in Eastern Europe, that I refused to believe that he was conspiring with the United Nations to create a one-world-governmentTM, and because I refused to believe that capitalism could not survive eight years of Clinton (and his socialist policies like free-trade agreements, welfare reform and balanced budgets)

Now that Bush is in power suddenly I'm a right-winger because I don't believe that Bush's excesses require his immediate overthrow, because I don't believe Chavez' accusations that he orchestrated 9/11 and because I don't believe that the world can't wait for two terms of a presidency.

The country waited for Clinton. It will wait for Bush. And whoever is next will have hysterical short-sighted people who will be more than happy to donate their time and money to people who will manipulate their hysteria and take their money and use it for goals that the "useful idiots" would never otherwise support. And they will accuse me of being a left or right winger (depending on who that new President is) because I don't share their hysteria.

[Tailgater]

Yes, when Clinton was President I was often called a left-winger because I refused to believe he was the secret manipulator behind the murder of Vince Foster, that I refused to believe that he arranged to have Ron Brown's plane crash in Eastern Europe, that I refused to believe that he was conspiring with the United Nations to create a one-world-governmentTM, and because I refused to believe that capitalism could not survive eight years of Clinton (and his socialist policies like free-trade agreements, welfare reform and balanced budgets)

Now that Bush is in power suddenly I'm a right-winger because I don't believe that Bush's excesses require his immediate overthrow, because I don't believe Chavez' accusations that he orchestrated 9/11 and because I don't believe that the world can't wait for two terms of a presidency.

The country waited for Clinton. It will wait for Bush. And whoever is next will have hysterical short-sighted people who will be more than happy to donate their time and money to people who will manipulate their hysteria and take their money and use it for goals that the "useful idiots" would never otherwise support. And they will accuse me of being a left or right winger (depending on who that new President is) because I don't share their hysteria.

Well said. People toward the center are extremists depending on who is in the room with you.

[Pardalis]

You can read my comments here (http://www.skepticfriends.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=6815&whichpage=4). Luke brought his comments there. I see no point in posting twice.

Why? You seem to have the "cut and paste" thing down very well. Besides, what is your username over there? Can you at least answer this question?

ETA: nevermind, I got who you are.

[RandFan]

Yes, when Clinton was President I was often called a left-winger because I refused to believe he was the secret manipulator behind the murder of Vince Foster, that I refused to believe that he arranged to have Ron Brown's plane crash in Eastern Europe, that I refused to believe that he was conspiring with the United Nations to create a one-world-governmentTM, and because I refused to believe that capitalism could not survive eight years of Clinton (and his socialist policies like free-trade agreements, welfare reform and balanced budgets)

Now that Bush is in power suddenly I'm a right-winger because I don't believe that Bush's excesses require his immediate overthrow, because I don't believe Chavez' accusations that he orchestrated 9/11 and because I don't believe that the world can't wait for two terms of a presidency.

The country waited for Clinton. It will wait for Bush. And whoever is next will have hysterical short-sighted people who will be more than happy to donate their time and money to people who will manipulate their hysteria and take their money and use it for goals that the "useful idiots" would never otherwise support. And they will accuse me of being a left or right winger (depending on who that new President is) because I don't share their hysteria. I did not vote for Clinton, twice. Yet I often found myself defending his actions and policies to friends and family and suddenly I became the liberal. I look back fondly at those years. I don't know how much Clinton contributed to my financial success of the time or my sense of well being but it's damn hard to fault him for those good times.

[BPSCG]

Yes, when Clinton was President I was often called a left-winger because I refused to believe he was the secret manipulator behind the murder of Vince Foster, that I refused to believe that he arranged to have Ron Brown's plane crash in Eastern Europe, that I refused to believe that he was conspiring with the United Nations to create a one-world-governmentTM, and because I refused to believe that capitalism could not survive eight years of Clinton (and his socialist policies like free-trade agreements, welfare reform and balanced budgets)

Now that Bush is in power suddenly I'm a right-winger because I don't believe that Bush's excesses require his immediate overthrow, because I don't believe Chavez' accusations that he orchestrated 9/11 and because I don't believe that the world can't wait for two terms of a presidency.You're a waffler! :D I'm a moderate...

[steverino]

By using a narrow enough field of view, a camera man can present the impression of an immense mob with that many people. First time I saw evidence of this was two different camera angles of a protest in Haiti, 1994.

DR

I live in Seattle and was warned by friends to avoid downtown driving because of the peace march. I chanced it. It lasted about a minute and a half. It was a very quaint statement.;)

[senorpogo]

You're a waffler! :D I'm a moderate...

mmm... waffles... (http://www.forthoseabouttoshop.com/waffles.php)

[steverino]

TEST:
ILLEGAL WAR
TORTURE
ILLEGAL IMPRISONMENT
DOMESTIC SPYING
MEDIA MANIPULATION
WAR PROFITEERING AND ROBBING OF US TREASURY
WOMENS REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS
IMMIGRATION ABUSE FOR POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC GAIN
LACK OF EQUALITY IN ECONOMICS AND CULTURE FOR ALL
ABUSES OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION
ABUSES OF THE BILL OF RIGHTS
ABUSES OF EXECUTIVE POWER
ABUSES OF EXECUTIVE PRIVLEDGE

THE USE OF RELIGION AS A DIVIDING ELEMENT IN POLITICS AND CULTURE.

...And a partridge in a pear treeeeeeee.:)

[Pardalis]

Skeptigirl, could you answer me these questions?

What do you think of the conspiracy theorists, the maoists and the people comparing Bush to Hitler within your movement. I know you said that you didn't approve of them, but what do you think of them being part of the movement? What do you say to them when you see them? Do you try to engage them in a debate? Does it bother you at all that they are part of your movement?

On October 5th, you must have encountered some of them.

[Foolmewunz]

My canned rant on the political spectrum. I don't have it on a clipboard but I've posited variations on it so many times that I should refine it.

Specifically,

In a political spectrum where you have Pol Pot and Khruschev over on the left, and Atilla and Adolf over on the right, if you were to scale that to exactly one meter(metre) in length, the Democratic vs Republican tug of war for votes would be about a one inch (2.5 cm) portion just a little bit right of center. Yet we spend endless hours/days/weeks/months debating whether your stuffed-suit-talking-head beholding to their special interests are more liberal/conservative than my stuffed-head-talking-suits with their special interests.

What happens is someone like RCP shows up, advocating overthrow of the government, and they somehow get lumped into the left, and the Democrats are on the left, so the association becomes automatic. Then the American Nazi Party comes along and they get lumped in with the right, so the Republicans wind up having to defend that side. Both are silly and obnoxious comparisons. The RCP, speaking from their heart, wouldn't get a whole lot of welcome at the Topeka Democratic Auxillary Pot Luck Dinner, I assure you. Nor would George Lincoln Rockwell have been terribly welcome at the Wm. Scranton awards dinner in Harrisburg.

I've had people call me everything from communist to neo-cryptic fascist reactionary stooge. :D

[Pardalis]

Bump for Sketpigirls' response to my question.

[Darth Rotor]

that I refused to believe that he was conspiring with the United Nations to create a one-world-governmentTM,
My, you are gullible. He tried, and Congress kicked his arse. The advantage of having a Congress in opposition to the White House was well displayed in his era, and its lack well displayed for GWB.

DR

[Pardalis]

bump, awaiting Skeptigirl's response.

[DaChew]

bump, awaiting Skeptigirl's response.

Don't hold your breath. At this point, it's obvious that this entire thread is nothing more than spam posted by Skeptigirl to promote the march. She never had nor does she have any intention of discussing this issue or answering any of the many, many, questions posed to her.

There is a word for people who post things like this.

[Skeptic Ginger]

bump, awaiting Skeptigirl's response.Told you, if you want to continue this discussion:You can read my comments here (http://www.skepticfriends.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=6815&whichpage=4). Luke brought his comments there. I see no point in posting twice. If you think your comments are important enough, then register and post there. I reply to most threads there.

Having to go out of your way to repeat your comments will filter out some of the chaff.

It's a pretty straight forward forum. If you try your asinine comments there, others will ask you to support your conclusions.

[Darth Rotor]

Told you, if you want to continue this discussion:
Hi shillgirl:

Your hype for the event was a lie, your predictions worse than the average weatherman's.

Crying wolf when a chipmunk is in the meadow is not a way to build street cred.

DR

[RandFan]

Hi shillgirl:

Your hype for the event was a lie, your predictions worse than the average weatherman's.

Crying wolf when a chipmunk is in the meadow is not a way to build street cred.

DR:D

When you can't get respect in a forum that has ardent Bush critics you have to settle for the choir.

Thanks Darth Rotor. Few if any had a worse user name.

[Pardalis]

Skeptigirl, why can't you answer my question here? I don't want to register into another forum. We are both here, so answer me here.

[Pardalis]

My questions again, Skeptigirl.

How do you feel about the 9/11 CTists, the Maoists and the people making comparisons between Bush and Hitler within the WCW movement? Doesn't it bother you? What do you say to them?

It shouldn't be too hard to answer.

[gtc]

Told you, if you want to continue this discussion:

You have repeatedly complained in this thread that you are being insulted.

I have read the thread over on that forum and the level of invective directed towards anyone with the temerity to admit that they voted Republican would (most likely) result in an instant banningn on this forum.

Unless you and I have very different definitions of what constitutes an insult, I am forced to conclude that your desire for us to go to another forum is at best hypocritical.

You are obviously under no compulsion to actually answer our questions, your refusal though speaks volumes about your credibility.

[DaChew]

Told you, if you want to continue this discussion:

No maam. YOU started this thread here. On this forum.

[Pardalis]

Skeptigirl, how about answering my questions?

[AmateurScientist]

<chirp chirp>

[DaChew]

Recipe:
Several generous slices of canned prepared meat product the ingredients of which include pork shoulder and ham (the common name escapes me at the moment)
two slices of bread
lettuce
tomato
mustard

Lay the slices of canned prepared meat product on one slice of bread. Add the lettuce, tomato and a generous amount of mustard. Top off with the second slice of bread. Enjoy.

[Darth Rotor]

Recipe:
Several generous slices of canned prepared meat product the ingredients of which include pork shoulder and ham (the common name escapes me at the moment)

Going backward in my memory maps this product to a sometime "fried and served with eggs" meat dish from my salad days. :)

DR

[Skeptic Ginger]

My questions again, Skeptigirl.

How do you feel about the 9/11 CTists, the Maoists and the people making comparisons between Bush and Hitler within the WCW movement? Doesn't it bother you? What do you say to them?

It shouldn't be too hard to answer.I didn't see any of them at the protest march I attended.

First, about Skeptic Friends Network, it is nothing other than a smaller forum of the same kind of people who frequent this site, and the BAUT forum. There are 10+ pages here of unmoderated insults I have no time to waste on. I defended my positions here and the replies included more pages of ignorant comments to wade through.

As it is, even on SFN, the main point of debate is the claim the RCP and SWP somehow represented the entire WCW protest on 10/05/06. Yet among the organizers, speakers, and people who attended, the RCP and SWP represented only a tiny fraction and none of the speakers. As many here, and Luke & Yoda on SFN post page after page about the RCP, I have seen no evidence they represent any more than a tiny minority of the WCW with the exception of having perhaps had a greater role initiating the movement. Luke has mentioned several times the WCW is a front for the RCP.

What is a front in this case beyond being part of the organizers? No RCP agenda was addressed at the event I was at. The emphasis was on getting Bush impeached or to resign.

Along with a call to vote out the Republican rubber stamping Congress, there was the inclusion of a bit of blame for the current situation on the Democratic Party. That comes from within and those of us who consider ourselves Progressive Democrats voice some of the same complaints about the failures of the Democratic Party to effectively counter the propaganda campaign of Karl Rove and assure that every vote was counted in both 2000 and 2004. There is nothing in those positions that reflect any RCP agenda beyond "driving" Bush out.

The speakers and the crowd at WCW protest I attended (and from everything I could see the speakers and attendees at all the other events) expressed a desire to restore the Constitutional government which the Bush administration has come close to destroying. There was no cry of Marx or Mao having a better idea. That's laughable.

Yes there were a few people with 9/11 CT signs. The world is full of people who believe such nonsense. WCW was certainly no exception there.

I don't recall any 'Bush is Hitler' signs but frankly, making torture, secret arrests, disabling the writ of habeas corpus, wire taps and massive data mining without warrants the official US policy are certainly actions one would expect to see in an authoritarian government, not a US Constitutional government. Some people are less able to see the distinctions between one authoritarian regime and another.

While you seem to think a few of these side shows are so serious one should avoid any WCW event or support, I find complacency about the increasingly McCarthyistic beliefs of those who continue to stand by Bush much more dangerous. I find the denial of someone who just yesterday repeated the latest blame Clinton for N Korea talking point much more worrisome than someone who would describe Bush as Hitler rather than articulate more specifically how Bush is undermining the Constitution. I find those who would agree with Ann Coulter's latest claim we have had peace because we "surrendered" time and time again much more worrisome than people who think there was a vast conspiracy behind 9/11. I find those who are so against abortion and gay marriage they would join with a Party that ignores the Constitution and started an unnecessary war at the cost of thousands and thousands of lives more worrisome than the fact some Progressive Democrats would join with the RCP in a national protest against Bush.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

So you admit that the whole thing was basically a flop?

[RandFan]

I find complacency about the increasingly McCarthyistic beliefs of those who continue to stand by Bush much more dangerous. There is no complacency. Folks here regularly give Bush hell. As they should. You B&M about unmoderated insults when in reality you lack the fortitude to make a case and then respond to it. You don't like being questioned. Well, this is a skeptics forum. Here it is expected that ideas should not simply be parroted. You have to defend your claims and often you must do so vigorously.

You don't deserve your user name shillgirl. I can't speak for anyone else but I don't have any respect for you. As I have noted before, many of the questions that you refuse to respond to are from people who don't like Bush. That's rather significant. And simply babeling everything as insults won't get help your credibility.

[Pardalis]

I didn't see any of them at the protest march I attended.

Oh really? You haven't seen any? This fellow seems to have come across quite a few of them in Union Square

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=65438

What is a front in this case beyond being part of the organizers?

That's the point, don't you feel you should disavow these nutjobs somehow? Why would anyone want to keep them in their organisation? I think it does your organisation alot more harm than good.

There was no cry of Marx or Mao having a better idea. That's laughable.

So you are saying there was none of them either?

Yes there were a few people with 9/11 CT signs. The world is full of people who believe such nonsense. WCW was certainly no exception there.

Again, why do you let them in your movement, shouldn't you say something about it? What do you say to them, do you try to confront them?

The only reason I see why you close your eyes about them is that you would let anyone who agrees with you say anything they want, even the most outrageous things, just because they are against Bush. This is trully pathetic, and morally despicable and intellectually dishonest.

I don't recall any 'Bush is Hitler' signs but frankly

Yeah right. You're a liar.

:words:
:slp:

[Pardalis]

I find the denial of someone who just yesterday repeated the latest blame Clinton for N Korea talking point much more worrisome than someone who would describe Bush as Hitler rather than articulate more specifically how Bush is undermining the Constitution.

The criticism of Clinton's policies regarding North Korea might have some elements of truth to them, no administrations have always been 100% right. At this point anyways, it's just partisan bickering...

The Bush/Hitler comparisons on the other hand are flat out lies, and distortions of history. It's fear mongering, and nothing else.

I find those who would agree with Ann Coulter's latest claim we have had peace because we "surrendered" time and time again much more worrisome than people who think there was a vast conspiracy behind 9/11.

Ann Coulter is one individual nut. The 9/11 "truth" movement is a growing idelology, a dangerous one... and you're helping it.

I find those who are so against abortion and gay marriage they would join with a Party that ignores the Constitution and started an unnecessary war at the cost of thousands and thousands of lives more worrisome than the fact some Progressive Democrats would join with the RCP in a national protest against Bush.

Woah... the infamous abortion-gay-mariages-the-Constitution-War-in-Iraq argument?

Abortion and gay mariages are social issues, and the Republicans, as much as you hate them and don't agree with them, have the right to their opinion. You can't blame them for trying to implement their ideas once they're in office, that's what they believe in.

The unrelated Iraq war is a complete and utter failure, nobody is denying it.

Third, why would Progressive Democrats join with an ultra Communist organisation for anything? People who join the Republican party because they feel they share the same values and ideology, I have no problem with. But to affiliate one's self with a completely different ideology, an abject one if I may say so myself, JUST BECAUSE they share a common hatred of someone, I find this particularly reprehensible.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Oh really? You haven't seen any? This fellow seems to have come across quite a few of them in Union Square

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=65438



That's the point, don't you feel you should disavow these nutjobs somehow? Why would anyone want to keep them in their organisation? I think it does your organisation alot more harm than good.



So you are saying there was none of them either?



Again, why do you let them in your movement, shouldn't you say something about it? What do you say to them, do you try to confront them?

The only reason I see why you close your eyes about them is that you would let anyone who agrees with you say anything they want, even the most outrageous things, just because they are against Bush. This is trully pathetic, and morally despicable and intellectually dishonest.



Yeah right. You're a liar.


:slp:

Great debate point there, Pard. Just claim I lie. And you wonder why I don't bother with this thread.

I don't know what the Union Square post is about but I was in Seattle. I listed the speakers, I went to the event. Nothing in your post addresses what I said. It's too bad you prefer your imaginary event to the real one I went to. Such is life.

[Pardalis]

Great debate point there, Pard. Just claim I lie. And you wonder why I don't bother with this thread.

I don't know what the Union Square post is about but I was in Seattle. I listed the speakers, I went to the event. Nothing in your post addresses what I said. It's too bad you prefer your imaginary event to the real one I went to. Such is life.

OK, I apologize for calling you a liar. But I don't believe you when you say that you didn't see anyone or any sign that said something like "Bush is Hitler". I absolutely don't believe you.

[Skeptic Ginger]

There is no complacency. Folks here regularly give Bush hell. As they should. You B&M about unmoderated insults when in reality you lack the fortitude to make a case and then respond to it. You don't like being questioned. Well, this is a skeptics forum. Here it is expected that ideas should not simply be parroted. You have to defend your claims and often you must do so vigorously.

You don't deserve your user name shillgirl. I can't speak for anyone else but I don't have any respect for you. As I have noted before, many of the questions that you refuse to respond to are from people who don't like Bush. That's rather significant. And simply babeling everything as insults won't get help your credibility.This post also ignores everything I said while you go on with your fantasy about my intellect, political position, and the actual event as well. You might get a kick out of posting this and perhaps enjoy the company of the other less than articulate among the crowd here. But if you think this post or your opinion bothers me, sorry, it doesn't.

[Pardalis]

Skeptigirl, you are willingly turning a blind eye to the more despicable parts of your WCW movement. Why is that?

I'm a Québec separatist, but not a activist one. But whenever I see a hint of extremism or lies I get appalled and swiftly try to confront these elements. If you feel your movement is right and has a just cause, you shouldn't let anything tarnish it.

[ARubberChickenWithAPulley]

I don't recall any 'Bush is Hitler' signs but frankly, making torture, secret arrests, disabling the writ of habeas corpus, wire taps and massive data mining without warrants the official US policy are certainly actions one would expect to see in an authoritarian government, not a US Constitutional government. Some people are less able to see the distinctions between one authoritarian regime and another.


I'm sorry, but several people have asked about the Bush/Hitler comparison, and your have consistently danced around the question. I personally don't care if you saw people carrying signs to that effect, since it is posted over and over and over on the WCW website, and the organizers of the rally very clearly advocate it. Adolf Hitler advocated systematically murdering people of specific races, religions, ethnicities, etc. with the intent of completely erradicating them from the face of the planet. He systematically murdered at least 6 million people, and that was only because he was stopped.

And by the way, Abraham Lincoln suspended Habeus Corpus. Franklin D. Roosevelt rounded up hundreds of thousands of U.S. citizens and put them in internment camps. Do both of them also warrant a comparison to Hitler? Were they authoritarian regimes?

Comparing Bush to Hitler is not only rediculous, it is ignorant, absurd, and completely indefensible. If you cannot see why that claim is offensive and rediculous, then you seriously need to change your name. You can list all your complaints about Bush all you want (as you keep doing), but not one of those comes anywhere near Adolf Hitler.

Your reply above is a great non-answer.

[gtc]

This post also ignores everything I said while you go on with your fantasy about my intellect, political position, and the actual event as well. You might get a kick out of posting this and perhaps enjoy the company of the other less than articulate among the crowd here. But if you think this post or your opinion bothers me, sorry, it doesn't.

You constantly insult people who respond to your threads and refuse to answer questions unless posed in a forum full of viscious insults.

Yet you claim to be a victim of constant insults.

Are you jesting?

[RandFan]

This post also ignores everything I said while you go on with your fantasy about my intellect, political position, and the actual event as well. You might get a kick out of posting this and perhaps enjoy the company of the other less than articulate among the crowd here. But if you think this post or your opinion bothers me, sorry, it doesn't.I didn't post it to bother you. I don't care how you feel. You are a true believer and it is unlikely that anything I say will ever get you to view the world in a critical and skeptical way. I only care to state the truth. In the end what you think about it is of no relevance to me.

[gtc]

I find the denial of someone who just yesterday repeated the latest blame Clinton for N Korea talking point much more worrisome than someone who would describe Bush as Hitler rather than articulate more specifically how Bush is undermining the Constitution.

Notice how poeople who oppose Skeptigirl are simply repeating talking points that someone else came up with. This strikes me as borderline conspiracy theory talk. In any case, it is refusing to accept that people may have actually thought through the issue and reached their own conclusions.

Furthermore, why shouldn't Clinton's inability to prevent North Korea acquiring nuclear weapons not be an issue for discussion? We know that during his Presidency the events of 911 were planned, North Korea, Pakistan, India, Iran and Libya were developing their own nuclear weapons programs. We know that all the evidence points to Iraq subverting the sanctions regime for the enrichment of its regime.

Why shouldn't we question to what extent Clinton missed the warning signs and botched opportunities to prevent these events? At the very least it will give us insight into the actions of Bush and may help us to identify which warning signs he is missing and what opportunities he is missing.

But none of this is possible if we subscribe to the WCW philosophy that Bush=Hitler, Clinton=almost as bad, entire system must be overthrown.

What I don't understand is why people go along with something that divides the activist community like WCW and is actively damaging to the Democrat's bid for government.

Why not just wait for another day and arrange a rally for people who want to impeach Bush in the context of the constitution? It would have been far more popular among the activist community and far less easily maligned by the mainstream.