Here are some pictures of the spirited anti-war event on December 14th, 2002

error

error

error

error

I just can't stand anyone defending the actions of Kathrine Harris in Florida. As Greg Palast has exposed in his report on the 2000 presidential election debacle in florida there is plenty of blame to go around for what occured in Florida during the 2000 election. Jeb Bush and Katherine harris among with other high ranking state officals (republican state officals at that) were involved in illegally removing the names of voters from the voting rolls. A disporportionally large number of the disenfranchised voters were african american who 90% of the time vote democratic. Gore tried to cheat after the fact with his whole florida supreme court fiasco, but Jeb Bush and Katherine Harris were directly involved in illegally denying people their hard won right to vote. This is a most dispicable act and its truely a shame that no one is going to be held accountable for it.

Ho hum. So we're supposed to take seriously someone that stoops to calling names and cut'n'pastes articles from the hysteric Ann Coulter? The people in the photographs don't look like angry children. They look like very nice adults: the sort of people that aren't afraid to show their faces in public as opposed to lurking on indymedie reproducing screeds from right-wing nutbags. Either summarize the essential points of the articles (if you're capable of it) and provide a link or else don't bother.

Mr. Bush Lover are you saying that Jeb Bush and Katherine Harris along with DBT removed felons from the voter rolls, however the criteria for determing who was a felon was criminally negligent.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/cta/progs/newsnight/palast.ram

Bush Lover before you reply if you have the nerveto reply, watch the real video clip here, it will take you about 15 minutes. After viewing this clip tell me, how can Jeb Bush and Katherine Harris not be directly involved in the removal of felons from the Florida Voter rolls. And how can you argue that Jeb Bush and Katherine Harris were not in any was biased in the out come of the elections in florida.

They say people get the leaders they deserve. In your case Bush idiot, you deserve a fascist twit like Coulter. Now stop spamming the IMC you troll..

Your commentary is joke! What cheap thrills do you get posting here? I would not be surprised that you concur with Trench Lott's bigoted (in no way revealing) commentary, about race relations in this country. Do you wear your swastika in, or out of your lapel? I wouldn't doubt that you praise racist bigots, like the Bush brothers, Ashcroft, and their bitches Colter and Harris. Your koolaid is foul, ignorant and devolved, you represent the many "Stepford Citizens" that are dumb enough to believe the 2000 election wasn't a Nazi coup.

My report on the Hollywood protest is here: http://lonewacko.com/blog/archives/000136.html

Are you done stroking each others meat yet?
Safe & warm sucking each others dicks?

You take your freedom for granted, and publicly masturbate.

We know the final agenda of the ruling class.
Three levels of society.
1. Above the law -Rulers
2. Enforcers of the law -Military/Police
3. Serfs living on the edge of survival at the whim of the rulers -us.
The process is apparent.
Manipulation of the financial, social and political framework to enable the rulers to consolidate and cement their absolute control of all resources upon which the majority of humanity depend to live.
The loss of ballot democracy (voter purges or outright numerical fraud as closed software allows special interests to determine desired results on ‘elections’) as exit polls become wildly divergent from election ‘results’.
Increased suppression of popular dissent through a program of terror.
The control of information through the process of media ownership by the ruling class.
And finally, the suppression of open information.
Happy new world order.

Sheepdog - You are one really sick puppy.

You've got all the opportunity in the world to get your act together and make something of yourself.

We don't have a ruling class. We have an equal opportunity country. Some rise to higher income levels and are successful. Some sink to mediocrity. The successful ones usually try harder. Those who don't succeed usually blame someone other than themselves (the ruling class, Republicans, the rich, whatever).

No ruling class?
Skull & Bones, for instance.
http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/8425/BONES.HTM
``We have now sunk to a depth at which
restatement of the obvious is the first duty
of intelligent men.''
-George Orwell
General stuff
http://www.mega.nu:8080/ampp/

A peace activist from the past. The more things change, the more they stay the same.

Sheepdog -

Animal Farm stands out as Orwell's best work. It's a quick read and it's a wonderful book. It's online here:

http://www.ddc.net/ygg/etext/animal.htm

Read it to better understand the process, and the inevitable result, of social revolution.

It’s only when the PIGS begin to look like the former oppressors that the revolution is betrayed. We arrived at this juncture over a hundred years ago.

>>> It’s only when the PIGS begin to look like the former oppressors that the revolution is betrayed.

And that always happens after a revolution, and it always will. That's the message Orwell intended to send when he wrote Animal Farm.

Revolutionary leaders are all like Fidel Castro. After they 'free the proletariat' they move into the Presidential Mansion and appoint themselves ruler for life.

Revolution is the road to dictatorship. The strongman needs 'true believers' as cannon fodder for his infantry though, so Anarchists and other dupes clearly do have a place in the scheme of things.

Stopping the war (any war that does not intail the right to survive)
is the first step in saying NO to the roach droppings who benefit
from the carnage. A revolution does not have as a prerequisite
the necessity of a grand leader. This is historical folly; we are now
in the position in this era of mass communication to do better
with a truly informed public. Grand leaders are superfluous.
Giving selected leaders the rights of kings to lead us into
the grinder of war is another giant leap backwards.
Clamping a lid on descent while dismantling the social
infrastructure is a formula for an eventual revolution painted
in blood. It’s just a matter of time and terror. A peaceful
revolution is preferred of course, but greed and power is
not an addiction easy to quit. That’s the problem.

When you are the party attacked, all wars entail the right to survive. And if someone is about to shoot you, you should probably shoot first.

Your rosy picture of an informed populace, while funny, is far from accurate. The Left is fond of this sort of disinformation. First, say that you don’t need leaders, and then appoint yourself as the unelected leader. Or, as in more recent memory, claim that ‘character doesn’t count’ in the leadership of a country as a cover for all the immoral and illegal behaviors of your chosen leader. Grand leaders are superfluous? Since when? Leaders are required in every field of human endeavor, without them we would still be picking fleas out of each others’ hair and dying with no teeth at 30.

As far as your swipe at the current administration (“selected leaders” real cute) and your analysis of history you really couldn’t be more wrong. In time of war US Presidents have had to make tough decisions and have had to suspend certain rights and privileges for the duration of the conflict. It is a testament to the strength of our Constitution and the character of our populace that we have weathered these periods in the past, and when the conflicts had ended, rights and privileges were restored. Your precious revolution exists only in your fevered dreams.

the courageous and independent spirit of the patriot:

"Leaders are required in every field of human endeavor, without them we would still be
picking fleas out of each others’ hair and dying with no teeth at 30." -'Simple Simon'



----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
anticrisis

Geez, and the Left still can't figure out why they are considered "dumbed down". Nazi? Killed 6 million Jews alone. How many has Bush killed? None. How many has Saddam Hussein killed, huh? Try between 75,000 and 150,000. So who's really the evil one here. Any of your family fight the Nazi's in WWII? What I can't figure out is why the Left screamed and cried and blamed Bush for not preventing 9-1-1, and when he is trying to prevent another one, they are protesting! Oh, sure they were onboard for a while singing "God Bless America" for a while, but being dumbed down, it shows how short a memory the Left has. Just goes to show that whatever he does, people will throw up whatever resistance they can, including Nazi and race cards, and the media will just jump all over it! Now, if you don't love this country, then get the HELL out, try bitching in some other country, whose President's name is NOT Bush, see how long you last in the very country you protesting in - such as Iraq. Join Alec, Susan, Julia, Whoopi and live the lie. Last I heard it was Al Gore's Father who voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964, along with many other Democrats. Numbers don't lie when they show that the Republicans are the ones who produced the votes to pass the Civil Rights Act. The same party that was responsible for a major turn of events in, let's say, 1865? Of course, times are different now, we are more modern, and advanced thanks to things like the Internet, which Al Gore claims to have invented. You believe that one too? Like I said, the "Dumbing of America". Now, go ahead, call me a racist!

Im not a fan of calling anyone hitler, either on the left or right.

But you neglect that Bush did kill people. The US under Bush has bombed Afghanistan, killing soldiers, civilians, canadian soldiers etc.

I am not saying that this deathtoll is equal to the deathtoll of ww2 (what a morbid question, any killing is wrong. Yet Im not a pacifist.), but Bush does have blood on his hands.

No, wrong.

The above poster said that the bush administration hasn't killed anyone.
I was simply pointing out that there was a war under his administration in Afghanistan. That people have been killed.
But Technically, yes, sure.
But the little game that our friend above is playing is pointing to leaders, not generals. So I guess our friend above would say that FDR (not Eisenhower at that point) has blood on his hands.
Geez, blood.
War sucks even if its somehow justified.
But death sucks too and the death of people should never be taken lightly. I would hope that any leader who sends people off to fight, and sends bombs to drop amung civilian areas takes into account the fact that everyone's lives are at stake.

"An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last." Winston Churchill