LowerCaseRepublican

HSC, a professor and Vietnam vet at my school Joe Miller was giving a speech about why we should oppose the war. (he is also one of the leaders of Vietnam Vets against war) and there was a pro-war activist standing behind him yelling "TRAITOR!" How is that a voice of reason? Or how about the pro-war activists I saw during my 9 hour protest and their argumentation consisted of "Kill that f***er Saddam, "bomb the motherf***ing Iraqis", "f*** the Iraqis", and "Bush!" But I do have to admit Joe's response to that guy was great. The guy was asked by Joe if he served and the guy said no. So Joe told him, "You know it's Republicans like you that are motherf***ers." and the guy got all angry and left, haha.

Check the "Some Links" thread and you can see pictures of our civilly disobedient march that the cops helped us with. (They blocked off traffic for us and everything). It's a mixture of all....I'm even part of the Champaign Urbana Presidential Prayer team which is praying for his removal from office....so we have activism, spiritual, and the legal aspects covered.

Bush is an ass in the international community. That's more than enough for me. Monday I am going to my Representative's office with impeachment documents written by Law Professor Francis Boyle.

How American, Red I support the troops. I don't supprt the deployment of them in an illegal war. C'mon Red, this nation was created on civil disobedience!

There are douchebags like that in every cause.

Dude, the Serbian Prime Minister got shot. This is turning into World War I all over again.

I am convinced that lots of presidents are corporate whores in both parties. It's sickening. The Democrats say something like "Save the environment" and then they go take money from loggers behind everybody's back. The Republicans just give the bastards an office in the West Wing. 9/11 was a terrible event that was brought on by our piss poor foreign policy. Now it's beginning to smack of 1984 with PATRIOT II in the works (which states that anybody caught by the government...citizen or not...for protesting the government "maliciously" or trying to "influence or coerce a government" will be deported for the US) HOW IS THAT FOR VAGUE WORDING TO BE ABUSED? The War on Terror...please tell me how killing everybody who hates us is going to make us safer. I personally think we'll all be safer when people aren't starving and we don't have places paying people piss poor wages so we can buy cheap running shoes. Having economic stability for people etc. is how to make our homeland secure...not some crazy missile defense system that Raytheon and Bush are planning. (Exactly how will tactical nuclear missiles from outer space stop planes from flying into buildings, car bombs, and other terrorist activities anyways?) It's beginning to look a lot like 1984, endless endless war..."Those who would give up essential liberties for temporary freedom deserve neither freedom nor liberty" - Ben Franklin

Actually flag burning is held up as a right in the Supreme Court, oddly enough (I had just read some stuff about it for a class). I peacefully protest with a lot of others. I also call my Senators and Representatives and start petitions etc. Hell, I am even part of the National Campaign working to Impeach Bush/Cheney/Ashcroft/Rumsfeld. (actually going over to my Representatives office Monday to serve up impeachment documentation) Protests have worked in the past, why won't they work again? We get the right to peaceably assemble and if they want burn the flag. I get just as sick watching the flag wavers calling people I know "pinkos, f**gots, etc" just because they don't agree with the Bush administration's jump to war. Watching a man call a Vietnam veteran a "traitor" yesterday while waving the flag was the ultimate hypocricy. (How dare we use our Constitutional rights to assemble and redress our government with grievances!)

Lower socio-economic people here are forced to enlist in order to get educational help. They want the education, not go out and have to slaughter fellow human beings. Kim Jong Il's people are starving, Musharref's people are starving because over 1/2 their government income went to create nukes, and there are tons of people in the war torn republics of S. Africa that are starving and dying under government oppression. Also, how about the Turks killing the Kurds as well (little known fact that they only condemned Milosevic's and Saddam's killing IF AND ONLY IF the Turk killing of Kurds would not be condemned.)

There are diplomatic solutions to get him out of power that were not attempted. Also, if he was such a brutal and bloodthirsty dictator, WHY DID RUMMY AND THE US SELL HIM WMD's? I am against Saddam's killing but "Fighting for peace is like f***ing for virginity". We happily supplied Saddam with the WMD's needed to do whatever he wanted. Now's its called "blowback", the same way the CIA had their "blowback" when we trained bin Laden in the 1980s. A short term orgy of feel good violence against Iraq won't solve the war on terrorism. What about the struggling former Soviet republics who have nuclear arsenals and could be willing to sell them for food? Or how about the growing Taliban movement in Pakistan (popular to about 30% or so of the population including much of the military which installed Musharref into power)...would we invade a country of 130 million people with nuclear capabilities to get rid of the new Taliban style regime? Or how about N. Korea whose people are starving? What is to stop them from selling their nukes to terrorists? The government needs to think of the long term consequences of their actions before acting because we keep having it blow back in our faces (read as 9/11)

War is terrorism. Not only for the people we are invading, but for us too. The troops' families who have to see them come back in body bags, etc. The only people it is a windfall for is the f***ing weapons manufacturers and George W. Bush who will try to ride this into re-election because war presidents usually get re-elected.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,3604,...,917741,00.html The Guardian (a major British newspaper spoke with countries in the Coalition of the Willing that seem to be doing a whole lot of not much for the US so it's not really a coalition) That aside, any country doesn't really like tourists. I mean, look at how German people have been beaten up in the past in Florida, etc. We have 6% of the world population and over 30% of the world wealth. And we have a lot of evil corporations that do a lot of shady stuff. They don't hate us individually, they hate our country because of it's, at times, incredible nature to be assholes. Also, don't let one person ruin an entire country. I've met plenty of f***tards in the States but it didn't make me believe that every person in the US was a fascist asshat. And by telling them to "f*** off", it's just perpetuating the hate and giving them more of a reason to hate us. The hate has to stop. Why aren't you all hating on Italy who is having a general strike, as we speak, to protest the war in Iraq? Or Germany who was also staunchly anti-war and gets a lot of it's oil from Iraq? Or how about a lot of Russia or China hate since they were against the war as well? (Iraq owes Russia $10 billion)

So, cruise missiles and bombs that destroy civilians' homes and kill/injure/maim innocents isn't "terrorism"?

When a terrorist attacks Champaign Urbana, then I know they have run out of targets. This war is just planting the seeds for more anti-America hate. It's piss poor foreign policy.

Saddam is a prick. However, I think there were better non-war substitutes for getting rid of his ass and toppling his power. On March 7, Blix stated that they were getting compliance and that lethal weapons were being destroyed, but Bush seems hellbent on going to war (I mean 10 million people on 2/15 protesting...the largest protest occurs in British history, that might just tell you something about how wrong it is) It saddens me that Bush kept going on his push to war ::chants "Support our troops / Send them home":: (nearly lost my voice chanting that yesterday during the march) but the pro-war people I encountered in the past weeks and especially recently are all like "This war is perfect for toppling Saddam!" to which I ask, "If you believe in it so much, then go serve" and they all turn tail and hide in their little posh lifestyle. Why the hypocricy? I think we all concur that we support the troops but I for one am against the piss poor diplomacy used by our "President" which caused the deployment of my brothers and sisters to go kill my dark skinned brothers and sisters over 1 guy being an asshat and some f***ing oil. (Exactly how did our oil get under their sand anyway?) That is why I protest the war. I have seen enough death and destruction in the 20 years I have been on the planet already and don't need to see more especially when there are peaceful solutions to the problem. I don't want to see Iraqi or American lives shattered, families grieving, and all the other horrible s*** that goes on with warfare. If Bush had such a tight case then why was Powell's speech plagiarized and filled with lies, why can't the CIA connect Saddam to bin Laden, et al.? Like Richard Nixon said, "Fighting for peace is like f***ing for virginity."

I'd guess it was NBC advertising the effectiveness of the US weapons (I mean since GE owns NBC and GE also is one of the largest arms manufacturers for the US military) It's sickening that GE, excuse me, the "news" would say that.

Faux News is horrid. After MSNBC's internal documents got leaked out that they fired Donahue for not having as many pro-Bush and pro-war people on while the other stations were being blinded by nationalistic fascism (yes that was the official reason...he wasn't kissing Bush's ass enough, so they cancelled the show) I can't trust MSNBC anymore. (Also the fact that NBC is owned by General Electric...one of the largest arms manufacturers and because of that they get editorial rights over the news. So of course their news is going to be "Rah Rah Don't our US weapons always work!" (yes because GE designed them ) I can't trust CNN after the '99 globalization protests in Seattle when they claimed that the police were being civil and that rubber bullets were not being fired at protesters, etc. The Independent Media Center then put up video from earlier in the day showing the police being violent with PEACEFUL (at the time) protesters and firing rubber bullets. Less than 15 minutes after that video hit the internet, CNN had to come on and admit they lied and said that bullets were indeed fired. The news in this country sucks ass. The Guardian is the way to go www.guardian.co.uk

Now THAT'S the way to get your "Peace and Love" point across :fyou Professor Joe Miller at UIUC (Vietnam veteran and member of Vietnam Vets Against War) was giving an anti-war speech at a rally yesterday. A pro-war activist stood behind him waving a flag and calling him and Doug Rokke (Vietnam and Gulf War I veteran) traitors for questioning the Bush rush to war despite the lack of evidence. How can you justify that? (Yeah, and Jello Biafra even called the guy out....he stayed the night after his lecture Wednesday night and gave an impromptu speech at our rally which was hella cool) But how can you justify pro war activist who deem people that question the government as traitors? Is that the way to be "Patriotically Correct" now? If so, then America is going to Hell and a handbasket. And the kicker, the guy calling people traitors had not served his country (yet he thought the war was so great) Like Joe Miller said to the guy "Republicans like that are just motherf***ers."

I didn't post them because I had myself banned for a while to more effectively work on the day after war started peace protests (which shut down Campustown for a while yesterday....pictures etc. in the links I had Jason post). It was very peacefully done in Champaign Urbana with the cops stopping traffic for our march and helping us every step of the way...even removing the 6 pro-war people who parked in private property and had them forcibly removed. Yes, we even went up and shook the officers' hands thanking them for all they did for us too. (The best part was when there were over 300 of us marching in the quad and 2 pro-war protesters showed up saying "We're the majority!" Then I told him, "If Saddam has weapons then Rumsfeld has the receipts" and he shut up figuring out that we sold them weapons of mass destruction in the 1980s. But he soon started screaming again and our entire group just starting singing "Give Peace a Chance" which drowned him out and he gave up. It was a really positive experience. Yes, I was threatened with violence by a lot of pro-war people yesterday. However, when I told them "If you think the war is so just, then go get enlisted and fight and possibly die. I will get you the recruiter information." to which they got scared and shut the f*** up. I was willing to march for hours, stand in the cold for hours on end, sit in the rain for the cause I believe in but those pro-war people didn't want to give up their posh apartment for one day to go actively do what they believe is right (i.e. go get recruited to join the war effort) This country was built on civil disobedience. Do you think the British were happy when we dumped the tea during the Boston Tea Party? Do you think that the whites in the South during the 1960s were happy that African Americans were successfully trying to break 'Jim Crow' laws et al. that oppressed them? This country has had a long standing of civil disobedience, but these peace protests are nothing compared to what happened during Vietnam. (i.e. Kent State) Blocking traffic is nothing to having the National Guard come in and open fire. I even had discussions with a few ROTC members I saw during the day telling them "We have the utmost respect for our troops. We support them the most because we believe diplomatic solutions that had yet to be exhausted were better than sending my brothers and sisters into harm's way." (And on a side note, one of the main chants in our march was "Support our troops/Send them home" so we are 100% behind our troops. We are just against Bush's west Texas old West "Mad Cowboy Disease" where he doesn't want to use international law or international unity to reach a peaceful agreement...he'd rather go in guns blazing and sort everything out later. (You'd figure that one day of protest gets the largest protest in British HISTORY and many others would get his attention...If you see the music video for System of a Down's song "Boom", you'll see a lot of the protests) And as for the inherent liberal bias in the media, the entire time during our march, not one media source came out to film us (Yes, we sent press releases to them notifying them multiple times in the weeks prior to the event) So we stormed the local TV station demanding "Where is the media?" and forced them to come out and cover the protest which they were going to avoid. Wouldn't a liberal media WANT to cover the protests? Maybe that's just my train of thought.

Hello and salutations. Hopefully you were all able to see the pictures in "Some Links" of the peace activities done in my area. We shut down the busiest street on campus. MM's reference to Kuwait's slant drilling into Iraq was the reasoning for Iraq's border conflict with Kuwait. That is why they invaded Kuwait. Iraq even went to the extent of asking April Glaspie, the US ambassador to Kuwait, in 1990 if the US had any stance on the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait. She said that the "US had no position". Then, less than a month later, we've killed thousands and even thousands more of our own troops have died from the mysterious Gulf War syndrome which Doug Rokke (former nuclear weapons inspector in Iraq 1991-1998) believes came from US bombing of chemical weapons plants. He also stated that according to the General Accounting Office and his contacts in the military, the gas masks being used by our troops are defective. We are sending men into battle with defective gear! He also helped with the formation of Resolution 1441 and stated that it does not authorize military force like the Bush regime would like to think (this is coming from a man who helped in the writing of it!) The war is indirectly for oil. I don't know how many people know of Jello Biafra, but he came to our university Wednesday with a very good theory backed up by a lot of facts. Paul Wolfowitz (#2 in the defense dept behind Rumsfeld) has installed a lot of US military bases in Qatar, UAE, Saudi Arabia, etc. and is pretty much trying build a fortress around the middle eastern oil. We get control of Iraq with a US friendly government and how much do you want to bet we go after our next target in the AoE...Iran? We get Iran and now we have nearly all the oil under our control and influence with US friendly governments installed. It's the "Curse of the Wolfman". And to the pro-war side, if you want to talk about defaming veterans...yesterday we had an anti-war rally on the quad with Doug Rokke (a Vietnam and Gulf War I veteran) and Professor Joe Miller (Vietnam veteran) amongst others giving speeches. While Joe was giving his speech a pro-war demonstrator showed up waving the flag calling him a "traitor" because he questioned the Bush regime's intentions and usage of war. So Joe asked the guy if he served and the man said "no" to which Joe said "Republicans like you are just motherf***ers." (into the PA system too, haha) So, if you would like to talk about the "Spit on soldier" then look no further than pro-war activists "spitting" upon groups like Vietnam Vets Against War (whom Joe is a member) just because of their anti-war stance.

http://salon.com/news/feature/2003/03/11/b..._war/index.html Salon.com did a 5 page article on it (you have to watch a 15 sec. commercial to get the all day free pass to read it all) Oh and HSC, like you told me about your sexcapades posts, "If you don't like it, don't read it." Have a nice day.

The Guardian also picked up the story. www.guardian.co.uk should get you to their site.

I had found this link on fark.com. I am sure that the CIBCAR (Campaign to Impeach Bush, Cheney, Ashcroft, and Rumsfeld) mailing list will have more information coming as it's available.

when exactly did bush sr. make that speech???...i got a feeling that speech was made last summer before the president went to the UN and thats what he was talking about... the reason i think that is because 300,000 troops ready to go to war... there has always been a unwritten policy that ex-presidents shouldnt speak out against current administrations and try to undermine their authority...though the honor in that might have died with ronald reagan...but with that as the bench mark even if H thought W was 100% wrong it would be appauling for him to speak out against any sitting president but especially his own son as the country is headed towards war... now as what H had to say...yes that is H to a tee...thats why i voted for perot in '92...thats why H was a one term president...he really had trouble doing the right thing when it wasnt popular...remember "read my lips"..then he caves into pressure from the dems and raises taxes...the ironic thing is clinton used that against him 92..saying H was dishonest..and H was giving into the democrats..i knew our country was in trouble after that..its also a big reason why clinton was elected president with only 43% of the vote... let me get off that tangent..but that is bush SR...he reminds so much of jimmy carter...neither guy really had the balls for the job...if this is the kind of advice H is giving W i hope he listens out of respect for his father then goes about his business...because W is a much stronger leader than H ever was...he is a much better president 2/27 the speech was made I believe.

Then that must mean you are for it? No, I am still against a pre-emptive unilateral war. But, I nearly shat myself that daddy Bush would come out on the same side as me.