April 10, 2004
INDC Presents: International Answer Protests in DC
Posted by Bill
When I showed up, a few moonbats were slowly circling around the stage, gathering their righteous energy for the impending rage against the machine. The crowd included button-hawkers, LaRouche supporters, some terribly earnest college gals and a couple of hippie booksellers. When I took the picture of the books, I was questioned by the lady behind the table as to whether I was a journalist. I told her "no, more of a freelance hobbyist," at which point I got a barrage of questions from her and her friend. They seemed acutely sensitive to the possibility that someone may be taking photos of the books in order to snicker at their ideology ...
The speakers were enraged by the Jooos, the military "atrocities" in Fallujah and most of all, George Bush: "I don't want Bush to go back to Texas, I want him behind bars!"
No one was spared their wrath, especially the private security contractors that were killed in Fallujah: "They get paid $1,000 a day, and what are they paid to do? They watch the oil!" Sound familiar?
The speakers were really hitting their stride, when all of a sudden some men started shouting from the right side of the stage. The cavalry had arrived, four Iraqi counter-protestors that decided to offer a different perspective:
I'm not sure that I've ever seen people move so quickly; there was a sucking sound as the entire horde of reporters mobbed the Iraqi counter-protestors. The International ANSWER folks were not pleased, and they immediately started shouting into the microphone: "These are CIA operatives! CIA operatives!" It did little good; the Iraqis effectively stole the spotlight.
The Iraqis then moved 20 feet away from the rally to give interviews, and one of the primary International ANSWER speakers maneuvered behind one of them and repeatedly yelled, "These men are CIA operatives hired by Ahmed Chalabi!"
The exchange between the LaRouche supporter and the Iraqi was amusing. The LaRouchie asked the Iraqi, "What about how Dick Cheney and Wolfowitz lied about weapons of mass destruction?" To which the Iraqi responded, "I don't know about that, but only God or the United States had the power to remove Saddam. There are no more mass graves in Iraq!" Notice the pamphlet cover on the Larouchie's sign: a picture of Dick Cheney that reads "Children of Satan II: The Beast Men."
At the end of the interview she asked him for the spelling of his name, and when he was reluctant to give it to her, she haughtily explained that she needed to say it correctly when she filed her report. I guess it escaped her that his background might make him hesitant to feel comfortable giving out that kind of information.
After she was done with the interview, she began laughing with her cameraman at the Iraqi's expense.
I walked over to her and asked, "Why were you laughing at that guy while he was answering your question?"
"I didn't (laughs again). I'm a journalist. I don't have opinions."
And then I left. I wasn't sure what to think; I was torn between anger and laughter the whole time. It's difficult to get that angry with them; a good portion of these people are ill, channeling their emotional pain into a political struggle, and no amount of reasoning with them would have any effect. Luckily, the worst elements marginalize themselves with their overt displays of lunacy, and fortunately, no more than a couple of hundred people showed up for this event. I'm certainly glad that the Iraqis showed up; they likely won a media victory.
Sometimes you just have to scratch your head and go home.
UPDATE: Speaking of Us vs. Them ...
ANOTHER UPDATE: Read about Citizen Smash's amusing stand at protests in San Diego. This is hilarious:
First up is Carl Muhammed. “Let’s get pumped up!” He shouts to the fifty people (Bryon did an actual head count) scattered in front of the stage. “Anybody have a chant they want to do?”
One of our guys shouts through the megaphone, “USA! USA!”
We take up the chant, “USA! USA! USA!”
Carl is flustered. “NO! How about an ANTI-WAR CHANT! How about USA out of IRAQ? Or USA out of AFGHANISTAN? Or USA out of CUBA!” He pauses. “USA out of NORTH AMERICA! How about that?”
We burst out laughing.
ANOTHER UPDATE: A reader leaves a link to more photos of these kindly individuals protesting previously in DC; real crushing of dissent in John Ashcroft's America. It seems that intimidation is their style; the media presence yesterday may have saved those Iraqis from a physical confrontation. I largely flew under the radar, but was held in contempt because I wouldn't take a protest sign, and the Palestinian speaker looked fairly angry when I jumped up on the right part of the stage to snap the "reporters swarm" picture.
The best way to comport yourself at these events is to smile, be really nice and tell them that you are a freelance journalist.
UPDATE: Also visit this post regarding subsequent protests in DC.
Posted by Bill at April 10, 2004 03:39 PM | TrackBack (47)
We're winning and you're losing!
DOWN WITH BUSH!
LONG LIVE KERRY!
Posted by: Iraqi Intelligence at April 10, 2004 11:34 PM
Very insightful comment by "I.I."
Posted by: The Commissar at April 11, 2004 12:12 AM
Didn't dude with the bicycle by the phones used to be in Krokus?
But hey, I've got a heart. If anyone that has a Rachel Corrie t-shirt needs it ironed, have 'em drop it off at my place.
Posted by: Model4 at April 11, 2004 12:51 AM
You small minded idiots don't realize how Hussein was a wonderful supporter of a woman's right to abortion. Hussein ordered many, many involunatry pre-emptive, post-birth abortions for men, women, and children. Now how can you say he didn't support women's rights. Sure you snotty people will say that involunatary pre-emptive, post-birth abortions are really mass graves but you are just too small minded to be progressive enough to care. So why don't you just go back to working so we can tax you to support Palestine.
Posted by: George Soros at April 11, 2004 01:03 AM
ANSWER and liberals do not want America to hear the truth, that the vast majority of Iraqi's support us and what we are doing.
This is why you saw these immature, cry baby antics. They aren't there to protest a war as much as they are there to try and bring Bush down.
I wonder what these sad fanatics will do when Bush is re-elected.
Posted by: Tim at April 11, 2004 01:03 AM
Where's a mini-gun when you need one?
Posted by: Ben at April 11, 2004 01:19 AM
One of the best entries to a blog I have seen in a while...great work. Wish I could find something as relevent for my blog.
Thanks for your efforts.
Posted by: Pierre Legrand at April 11, 2004 01:28 AM
When Bush wins in 2004 the Dems will have to go on Sucide Watch.
Posted by: Chip at April 11, 2004 01:30 AM
Mini, my ass. Bring the big guns, with lots of bullets. That Corrie t-shirt would make an excellent target.
Posted by: Matt at April 11, 2004 01:30 AM
The tragic irony is the contradiction of the protestors' agendas... if these same protestors were in a nation under Sharia Law the abortion rights people would be rounded up and stoned... the gays would be rounded up and beheaded... the leaders of the protest would be rounded up, beaten and tortured and those that were appropriately contrite allowed to escape a bullet to the head... every woman not in a burkha would be publicly beaten...
It's really willful idiotarianism...
Posted by: DANEgerus at April 11, 2004 01:32 AM
2 QUESTIONS -
1) The guy who was yelling fuck you fuck you wey're winning was actually yelling that at the Iraqi guy giving the interview, as in fuck you the "Resistance" in Iraq is winning?
2) The "Jack Booted Fascists" were really jack booted neo nazis or cops? One of the guys was black?
Posted by: Mike at April 11, 2004 01:35 AM
That is just funny. These people are seriously deranged.
Posted by: GeronL at April 11, 2004 01:36 AM
"I wonder what these sad fanatics will do when Bush is re-elected."
I've been wondering that myself. A lot of these kids don't understand that he's the President, not the king. The world won't end when Bush is re-elected, but they think it will. What will they do? Will they become terrorists of a sort themselves, starting a meaningless and pointless revolution? Likely not. Most of these kids probably don't have the ability to do something like that (at least I hope not).
It seems as if the Left has lost their minds. I heard someone describe it as "Bushinitis," a disease that affects people who are normally reasonable. The idea that Bush lives in this country, much less the fact he is President, makes them so enraged they lose the ability to think clearly. In the long run, all of this hatred is going to backfire on the Democrats. These kids will grow up and realize the world didn't end after eight years of Bush, and they'll begin to question what they were told. In the short run, the hatred will just cost them the election.
Posted by: Cool Tester at April 11, 2004 01:48 AM
Everyone, please take join me in this solemn vow: never again will I refer to them as "anti-war" protesters, from now on I shall refer to them as the "pro-fascism lobby"...
Posted by: John LeBlanc at April 11, 2004 01:56 AM
Bill, on the picture where the long-haired guy was singing and playing the guitar: was his adoring groupie a woman or a 12yo boy with a crewcut? It's kinda hard to tell from the picture...
Posted by: Chris at April 11, 2004 02:40 AM
Young, pimply-faced college gal. Shy. I walked up to her and asked her if they had any type of programs, and her attractive friend told her "don't give anything to him," presumably because I had politely refused to take one of the protest signs that they were handing out.
Posted by: Bill from INDC at April 11, 2004 02:45 AM
When Bush wins in 2004 the Dems will have to go on Sucide Watch.I'll volunteer to watch them commit suicide. Think it can be arranged on a weekend? I'll even bring my own adult beverages. :-p
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut at April 11, 2004 02:53 AM
I live here in the SF Bay Area so I see (and hear) this crap all the time. Ya just gotta shrug.
I still remember the Berkley City Council passing some resolution about apologizing to Bin Laden for something or other and declaring that going into Afghanistan was wrong because 'violence begets more violence'.
I just wonder what they would have done if Bush came out and said "I respect the position of the Berkeley City council and as a support of solidarity, I declare that any attacks in Berkeley will not be responded to."
Then I grin.
Posted by: RedBull Junkie at April 11, 2004 03:13 AM
Cognitive Dissonance and Socialism... "Someone bent my wookie."
Posted by: ClueX4 at April 11, 2004 03:20 AM
a mini-gun doesn't mean a small gun (Ben said "Where's a mini gu when you need one?") A mini-gun refers to the gun that has multiple barrels mounted on a disc that rotates so that the gun shoots rapid fire while alternateing which barrel is firing (to lower the stresses on any one barrel) - in other words, they're kick-ass super-fast machine guns that you could use to mow down wave after wave of hippies
Posted by: CriscoBoy at April 11, 2004 03:31 AM
Ya, these are people I would trust to have make good decisions. does anyone have some overpass addresses where we can discuss our future further?
Posted by: velmont at April 11, 2004 03:44 AM
Hey Bill, the woman in the leather jacket that screamed "These men are CIA agents hired by Ahmed Chalabi!" in the Iraqi's ear, she looks familiar. I think she's in this video here: http://brain-terminal.com/video/rutgers-2003-10-11/index.html
It's weird, I can't find info on her in the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy Database. Are some of the server's down at the V.R.W.C. headquarters at Area51?
Posted by: mrbobshoe at April 11, 2004 04:03 AM
" Hey Bill, the woman in the leather jacket that screamed..."
Posted by: Giuseppe at April 11, 2004 09:48 AM
She's attractive and batshit crazy - that's hot! Her name is Mara Verheyden Hilliard, she can be heard in a previous 2003 interview can be heard here:
I wasn't sure if it was her, after all, no yelling allowed on NPR.
Posted by: Bill from INDC at April 11, 2004 10:17 AM
Great photo essay! Made me laugh. The inanity of it all.
Posted by: shelle at April 11, 2004 11:02 AM
I just want to tell you how much I appreciate that you are documenting these events. Thank you so much for the effort! Please keep up the good work!
Posted by: Carol at April 11, 2004 11:07 AM
Bill, awesome job. I need to do one of these protest round-ups on my blog sometime. I'll be starting school in DC in late August, so I'm hoping to cover the RNC counter-protest and the pro-terror protest on 9/11. Seriously, if there's more than a dozen people at the 9/11 one, the cops will have to worry about me going "weapons-hot"!
Posted by: Eric at April 11, 2004 11:08 AM
So what was the total moonbat attendance? 60 maybe?
We've got people trying to get food and medicine to Iraqis having their bodies muitilated, and this PSYCHO-BITCH wants to talk about reproductive rights????
I'd laugh if it weren't so fucking sad.............
Posted by: Li'l Mamzer at April 11, 2004 11:08 AM
Great post. I think this is why blogging is relevant. You get to actually see things you think are relevant instead of what left leaning journalists think. great.
Posted by: Ricky Vandal at April 11, 2004 11:35 AM
Mara VerHeyden-Hilliard is the name of the anorectic screaming leftist in leather. She and her husband Carl Messineo are "founders" of the lae firm, Partnership for Civil Justice. Their law firm takes cases of people whose civil rights have been violated, or so they say.
In reality, Mistress Mara and her green-hatted National Lawyers Guild "observers" have been intimately and actively involved in the violation of others' civil rights. For photos and commentary documenting one of the leather-clad Lassie's hypocritical actions last May 24th, check out this link:
Babbling Boob Brian Becker was also in action that day.
Your report and photos of yesterday's embarrassing performance by the ANSWER leftists is great, Bill! Thanks for being there to document it. I am glad you made it out of there safely. These left-wingers are notorious for their violence and threats of same.
Posted by: tgslTakoma at April 11, 2004 11:59 AM
Those Birkenstock blithering idiots were supposed to be Demontrations???? Looked more like a casting call for extras in 'Night Of The Living Dead'!... I sneer and spit condescendingly at the miserable turnout! I fart in their general direction! I also laugh my a$$ off at the money ANSWER and Soros have thrown away!... Less than 30 seconds of badly edited, confused air time on the local NBC staion in Washington, DC!
Posted by: Jack Deth at April 11, 2004 01:25 PM
And it's people like these who are always claiming Bush is dumb.
Posted by: zetetic at April 11, 2004 01:59 PM
Crisco, is that the same as what used to be called a Gatling gun? (I.e., the kind they put on A-10's?)
About a year ago there were incidents in London and SF where Iraqi counter-protesters tried to make themselves heard at ap"peace"ment demos and were kicked out. It's great to know these guys had better success.
Absolutely great story. Too bad the Iraqis had to give their names. Guys, if you ever need a place to crash incognito, mi casa = su casa.
Posted by: Asher Abrams at April 11, 2004 02:36 PM
Same old hoopoe munitions on the part of ANSWER.
BTW, this is having some trouble loading. I'm using Mozilla.
Posted by: Korora at April 11, 2004 04:15 PM
I'm so glad bloggers are there to photograph this stuff. My state's very conservative, so I don't get to see the angry Left fly its freak flag unless it's on C-Span or I'm visiting San Francisco.
Brian Becker is a complete tool. He's travelled numerous times to North Korea. When you think the US is evil but North Korea isn't like Brian Becker does, you realize there is something profoundly fucked up with these people.
Posted by: Moonbat_One at April 11, 2004 05:29 PM
I think the chick in the Rachel Corrie t-shirt is kinda cute. As is the short press-chick wearing the red top in the NBC reporter picture. The one who's eyeing the NBC woman with a combo pity/scorn/"Whatchoo talkin' bout Willis?!" kinda look....
Moonbat liberal chicks are just so CUTE sometimes. Take Katrina van den Heuvel (ed. of The Nation) for instance...what a freakin HOTTAY!!! If only she had a brain to go with that bod! Rrrrrow!
Posted by: EGC7 at April 11, 2004 07:42 PM
You realize that Katrina van den Heuvel would likely stake you spread-eagle over a badger hole if she heard that comment ...
The press-gal wasn't amoonbat, but you should have seen some of the bonefied Int'l Answer girls - very cute. Very misguided. I get the impression that the emcee in the pictures is sort of a Jim Jones type ...
Posted by: Bill from INDC at April 11, 2004 07:47 PM
If only I had a leadership position in an international Stalinist organization...and some Ecstacy...oh the fun...
Posted by: Eric at April 11, 2004 08:08 PM
"van den Heuvel" is Dutch for "I need a man bad."
Posted by: Raoul at April 11, 2004 08:24 PM
You Ratty RaTS ARE ANTI-AMERICAN BASTARDS!!! TO HELL WITH YOU AND THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY!!!!!!!!!
Posted by: TLBSHOW OFF at April 11, 2004 09:09 PM
No Model4. The dude on the bike was that guy from "The Warriors" that kept clicking those beer bottles together and yelling, "Warriors, come out to plaaaayyyeee!" The screechy irritating pantywaist tone is just about right anyway! Seperated at birth! :-o
Posted by: JarheadDad at April 11, 2004 11:43 PM
XERXES: this blog does not tolerate saying "fuck Muslims or Arabs." The writer of this blog has friends that are both muslim and Arab.
Posted by: Bill from INDC at April 12, 2004 01:31 AM
Thanks for your unbiased and creative reporting. With reporting like this there will be no need for checking facts.
One more thing, the long hair guy was actually for the war, hence; "Fuck you! Fuck you! We're winning!" I guess he is not that dumb and ugly after all!
PS RedBullJunky, you should move to Alabama, you'll be right at home!
Posted by: KickRaoul at April 12, 2004 02:55 AM
Posted by: BufordP at April 12, 2004 07:25 AM
*I'm not a reporter and I am far from unbiased.
*I also apologize for not snapping a pic of the screamer in wide open, full-throated, harpie wail. At that point she was probably just talking REALLY REALLY loud.
* The fact was that she was directly behind the man yelling that he was a CIA operative in an attempt tp drown out what he was saying to reporters. To be fair, he showed up and began shouting while they first were trying to have their "Black Pan-ther par-teeeeee..." To be fair again, they had a microphone set to an ear-splitting volume. To be fair again ... ah fuck it - these people were crazy, Communist nut-bags!
Who said that the long-haired guy was ugly? I thought he sort of had that WWF "mankind" look, which some women may find very attractive.
Posted by: Bill from INDC at April 12, 2004 07:39 AM
Question, the orange shirt, is that symbol on it a pancake?
Posted by: Sir Knight at April 12, 2004 04:32 PM
"Gatling gun" == automatic weapon with multiple barrels mounted in a cluster revolving around a common axis
The GAU-8 30mm Gatling gun mounted on the A10 close support aircraft is a *big* Gatling gun. Most all US fighter aircraft use the M61 "Vulcan" 20mm Gatling gun.
But General Electric ("GE! We bring good things to life!") makes smaller Gatling guns which US military slang calls "miniguns" for the obvious reason, down to one that uses the same 5.56x45mm NATO cartridge that the M16 rifle uses, but with a disintegrating link belt feed. You may have noticed Governor Ventura hauling it around in the film "Predator." It fires 130 rounds a second, by the way.
Posted by: Mr. Mayhem at April 12, 2004 05:44 PM
Also in Terminator Two, you see the current Governor of California ripping apart the police vehicles outside of CyberDyne with a mini-gun.
Posted by: James Stephenson at April 13, 2004 03:25 PM
Bill, this is a legitimate question, from a concerned liberal on "the other side" of the political fence.
Are you worried at all when people reply to your post with comments about shooting or killing the "moonbats"? Maybe we're talking about different standards here, but I personally would object highly to people on my blog calling for the death of pro-war demonstrators. I may disagree with Bush supporters, but I can't imagine tacitly condoning (by allowing it to continue without comment) a discussion of the best weapons to use to murder them.
Posted by: Kynn Bartlett at April 13, 2004 03:28 PM
Not that it matters, but the minigun used by Gov Jesse in Predator was the older 7.62mm type, not the 5.56mm (which wasn't in use for another 2-3 years AFTER the making of the movie) In either case, it was all special effects, the recoil from any weapon with that ROF would have knocked even Jesse "the Body" Ventura off of his feet...
OK, I had my little rant, back on the medication now...
Posted by: Scott at April 13, 2004 03:39 PM
Those four Iraqis were CIA agents, huh?
Yeah these folks are seriously mentally ill. Also worth noting, the guy who screamed "Fuck you! We're winning!" is pretty sad. Only hysterical, desperate people who know they are losing hard do things like that.
Posted by: Anne Haight at April 13, 2004 03:55 PM
As a small-l liberal, I might roll my eyes but consider this. They WON'T be machined gunned. Even if they could get away with it, I find it unlikely that they'd do more than shout and cuss at them. Compare that with ANSWER who make it clear on no uncertain terms that they actually *get* *off* on dictatorships (they are pro-North Korea and support the Iranian Mullahs *against* the Iranian student democracy movement). Consider their unapologetic intimidation of anyone who disagrees with them when the news media *isn't* there to cover their nasty behavior against couter protesters or even those who ask serious but critical questions.
When conservatives talk about killing people at these protests, I see it as inarticulate blowing off of steam against some vile, vicious, hypocritical, and evil (esp the organizers) people. However, when I see ANSWER and their minions doing it, I seem them pining and planning to carry it through "the day they take over."
Posted by: (Not the Bill runs the blog) at April 13, 2004 04:03 PM
LOLx10 Leon Trotsky on fascism -- someone hand me a kleenex.
Posted by: mountb at April 13, 2004 04:06 PM
[quote]Are you worried at all when people reply to your post with comments about shooting or killing the "moonbats"? [/quote]
I don't think anyone here is worried. I know I'm not. I think everyone here has a healthy Judeo-mother-f*cking-Christian sense of right and wrong and a good sense of humor.
Them moonbats, on the other hand . . .
Posted by: SkipKent at April 13, 2004 04:08 PM
To Kynn, the reason people are so upset with the "anti-war" protestors and want them dead (in some cases) is the simple fact that they are indeed not actually "anti-war" protestors, but Anti-America protestors. These people openly HATE the US and do whatever they can to undermine our position in the World. They would love to see our Sole Super Power status crushed and have us end up like the Solcialist Basket Cases around the world. These people are Communists, and they support the Terrorists we are fighting for the survival of civilization around the world. Personally I believe they have a right to their opinion as long as they do not cross the line and begin supporting our enemies and providing them aid and comfort. Once that line is crossed, it time to go hot and bring smoke.
Posted by: Steven I Szabo at April 13, 2004 04:22 PM
C'mon folks. You *know* you wanted to join in one of these "protests" and pretend to believe in this nonsense. I know I do. It might even be worth it to bone up on Marx, Chomsky and Trotsky just to join in.
I don't think I could imagine anything more amusing than egging these people on.
Posted by: ed at April 13, 2004 04:24 PM
To Kynn, the reason people are so upset with the "anti-war" protestors and want them dead (in some cases) is the simple fact that they are indeed not actually "anti-war" protestors, but Anti-America protestors.
Heck, Steve: They're not just Anti-America, they're anti-Freedom and anti-Life. To paraphrase someone who got them right on the money, whenever there is a boot steping on a human face, there is a member of NION or ANSWER berating the poor slob for complaining and reminding him that if he suvives his current session, he'll get his free bowl of gruel (with extra weevils at no extra cost). As a top-notch anti-idiotarian (and *liberal*) blogger once said, they want to BE the dictator. And for that, maybe they do deserve to reap the seeds they want to sow for others.
Double-Heck, even *I* want to get behind the wheel of a giant riding mower and run 'em down.
Posted by: (Same other Bill from before) at April 13, 2004 04:36 PM
Is it just me, or do others keep hearing the voice of that guy from the National Geographic (or some such) show speaking reverentially in hushed tones when looking at photo spreads like this:
Posted by: TC-LeatherPenguin at April 13, 2004 04:58 PM
Great blog documenting some real nutcases. A footnote: on the ANSWER website Cuba campaign they list the countries that are threatened by US "aggression" - in addition to Cube, there is Iran, Syria, and North Korea. all model countries in the eyes of ANSWER. If I had Soros's money I'd fullfill all of thier dreams and buy them a one-way ticket to socialist utopia (aka N. Korea).
Posted by: Ray at April 13, 2004 05:34 PM
Looks like a bunch of low-bred gomersexuals to me.
Posted by: Felton at April 13, 2004 05:57 PM
As you might see from this later post:
No, I am not concerned. Several commenters showed up and uttered anti-arab and anti-muslim slogans after the post, and their comments were warned against (scroll above) and deleted. In contrast, the freepers and military guys (and anyone else) that crack wise about calling in airstrikes or using a mini-gun are a-ok ... unless they are actually planning on setting up a mini-gun, of course.
It's all tongue-in-cheek. And if you still feel concerned, ask yourself how many times you've told someone that you are going to "kill" them.
Hope that helps.
Posted by: Bill from INDC journal at April 13, 2004 05:58 PM
ANSWER and other socialist jackasses are so disconnected from reality, so uninformed about the historical consequences of their "utopia," so ignorant of advances in embroyology proving abortion to be a hideous monstrosity, that arguing with them strikes me as pointless.
Posted by: Mark at April 13, 2004 06:49 PM
As a counterprotester against ANSWER this summer, I had the extreme pleasure of pissing off the nutjobs for an entire day. ProtestWarrior held a counter rally against them and we were forcibly removed by their thugs. So we stood across the street and laughed at them. I have no worries about the election, seeing as how most of these moonbats wouldn't know how to register much less actually vote. Besides, Kerry is too conservative for them. PS, when I asked a group of approx. 100 of the moonbats to just repeat "GOD BLESS AMERICA" after me, not one word. And this from a group that supposedly "supports the troops". My ass.
Posted by: Mark W at April 13, 2004 11:33 PM
Look! Moonbat larvae!
Posted by: Natalie at April 13, 2004 11:45 PM
I don't tell anyone I'm going to "kill" them. But it's interesting to note there are several contradictory responses to my question from several of your commentors. One says roughly what you say -- "we're not going to kill anyone, it's just joshin' around and showing our anger."
The other kind of response says "well, the reason we want to kill them is because [... several reasons ...]"
Your response, Bill, would bother me less if it felt like you weren't turning a blind eye to the people who are seriously arguing that International ANSWER activists _deserve_ death. In the comments above, there are several people who articulate why they need killing.
I'm not convinced they're joking as you claim to be. I find the idea of running over people with lawnmowers for their political views or mowing them down with miniguns (I knew what the term meant, even if some of your readers didn't) to be as offensive as this: Democratic club's ad suggests shooting Rumsfeld
In neither case do I agree with the sentiment expressed -- as a pacifist and Christian, I object to all killing, and as an American I specifically object to killing someone for their politics. The folks with minigun fantasies are as scary to me as the folks with fantasies about shooting Rumsfeld. Political disagreements shouldn't be settled by killing the other side.
Or, joking about killing the other side.
Posted by: Kynn Bartlett at April 14, 2004 12:01 AM
To George Soros:
Excellent parody. You should post more often.
Posted by: Tim at April 14, 2004 12:59 AM
I'll make my position clear: I don't think that we should advocate killng people for their political views. Tying them down and tickling them until they embrace capitalism, maybe. Orgiastic moonbat killing spree, no.
I'll have to review the comments above, but generally I do not delete unless something expresses a hateful/violent sentiment that is devoid of point or irony.
I suspect from your tone that this may be a generational gap we are having. When "criscoboy" says "in other words, they're kick-ass super-fast machine guns that you could use to mow down wave after wave of hippies," I have little doubt that he is joking.
For reference, visit the following site: www.imao.us
Posted by: Bill from INDC at April 14, 2004 01:14 AM
I can understand how you might see things differently, but I truly believe the comments about "wasting" the anti-war people are not meant to be taken seriously. That's not a comment on their humor content, only their intentions.
Posted by: Tim at April 14, 2004 01:41 AM
I don't think we will need a suicide watch. I think we will need to watch this bunch of moonbats very closely after the election. When Bush wins, especially if he wins big, these guys *will* try to go after him and anyone in the administration they can get their hands on.
These ANSWER thugs are the ones trying to silence opposing points of views by shouting in the ears of the Iraqis at the counterprotest, while the media was interviewing them. These folks are the ones who support Palestinian suicide bombers, the Iraqi insurgents, the Iranian mullahs, and Saddam's vicious thugs.
Sorry but I ain't buying whatever it is that Kynn is selling. These thugs have shown time and time again they want us dead. They want someone else to do it to us, not get their own hands dirty, or themselves jailed, but the sentiment is there in spades. And then they have the nerve to lecture us about pacifism.
To me, this is merely proof that pacifism is something they are hoping to use against us, to make it easier to kill us. And if folks like Kynn hope we won't respond in kind, or think they can talk us out of defending ourselves, they are sadly mistaken.
No, we won't need a suicide watch. We will need to beef up security around the President and his aids. We will have to guard our own homes against these fascists, these Nazis, these latter day brown coats in hippy clothing. I would like to think they were harmless if deranged folks, and am worried that such is exactly the image they want to protray, to goad us into over reacting before they make their move.
If Bush wins, these folks will not kill themselves, but try to kill us. Kynn and their ilk may have a good heart and be actually concerned about overreaction on our part. But part of me is concerned that what Kynn actually wants is for us to let them kill us.
Posted by: Ben at April 14, 2004 03:58 AM
It's not Kynn, you imbecile. Pacifists are different from the people at this protest. Pacifists opposed the war, but most support staying in and helping Iraq rebuild. The "moonbat" "liberals" want us to fail. They want to see us shamed. I would agree, however, that some of these people need to be watched closely like Brimbauer, who was a congressional aide recently arrested by the FBI for spying for Saddam. When she was lead away in shackles, she screamed, "I'm an anti-war activist! I don't regret anything I've done!" Most are misguided, but I wouldn't say harmless if this woman is trying to give state secrets to our sworn enemy.
Posted by: Eric at April 14, 2004 08:29 AM
When Michael Friedman (who lives in mainland China) recently had his blog campaign to email Daily Kos's advertisers, Kynn Bartlett in comments not-so-subtly suggested that somebody should sic the Chinese government on Michael Friedman and (at the very least) get his internet connection shut down in retaliation.
So I guess killing "anti-war" protesters may be out for a good-hearted liberal like Mr. Bartlett, but getting governments involved to suppress offending viewpoints is apparently a-okay, especially if those governments are known to be fond of dishing out some good old-fashioned jackbooted crushing of dissent. Sorry, I don't find his posturing here the least bit convincing.
Posted by: PW at April 14, 2004 10:56 AM
the distinction between the ANSWER thug's bloodlust and their well-of-tolerance-done-got-sucked-dry critics should be pretty clear for you to intuit. ANSWER wants people up against the wall in real life sometimes simply for disagreeing with them. Listen to them unfiltered and away from polite company. I have. It's not pretty and I'm sick to death of their apologists and those who insist that they don't know that they dig Kim Jong Il, Castro and the Mullahs.
Meanwhile, ProtestWarrior, INDC and the rest (me included, I s'pose) are just bloody frustrated with people screaming "No Blood for Oil" when they [sometimes openly] endorse some of the most vicious and cancerous and illiberal regimes on the planet.
To summarize, one side means it (ANSWER). Meanwhile the other side shows frustrated bluster while at the same time not only recognizing their freedom of speech but acutally providing free advertizing for ANSWER - albiet truthful advertizing - much to ANSWER's distress). It's not that hard to evaluate the two as being worlds apart.
Posted by: BillC at April 14, 2004 05:25 PM
Meanwhile the other side shows frustrated bluster while at the same time not only recognizing their freedom of speech but acutally providing free advertizing for ANSWER
And to make a long screed longer... Which side, irregardless of aforementioned bluster, is more likely to quite Voltare's line about defending people's right to disagree to their own deaths, and which side well... starts screaming that their critics are CIA activists in order to drown out their critics (and thats when they're feeling "benevolent").
Bluster's cheap, even free. But its actions that count.
Posted by: BillC at April 14, 2004 05:33 PM
I will have pics and anaysis of some more recent protests (that took place today) sometime tomorrow. Stay tuned.
Posted by: Bill from INDC at April 14, 2004 05:56 PM
So I guess killing "anti-war" protesters may be out for a good-hearted liberal like Mr. Bartlett, but getting governments involved to suppress offending viewpoints is apparently a-okay, especially if those governments are known to be fond of dishing out some good old-fashioned jackbooted crushing of dissent. Sorry, I don't find his posturing here the least bit convincing.
Actually, I said it shouldn't be done, and I gave very clear reasons why.
I clearly don't believe that Friedman should be dragged off the by Chinese communist government -- and I said as much, up front and directly. Trying to claim otherwise is simply an attempt to smear me.
I accept the people who say they're convinced it's just a joke. I'm glad for your optimism and your desire to see no one killed, beaten, or otherwise physically attacked for their views.
I find it reprehensible when someone on my side suggests such a thing, and I'm quick to condemn it whenever I become aware of it. Maybe I am too quick to do so -- maybe, like you, I should assume they are just joking, and laugh along with it.
However, I have seen reports of people on both sides of the issues -- "my" side and "yours" -- being attacked and sometimes seriously hurt for their beliefs. That is why I think it is better to be clear that violence is not acceptable even as a humorous response, and why I think it does not reflect well on you to "play along" with the joking.
There HAVE been peace activists who have been attacked. And there HAVE been counter-protesters who have been attacked. Both actions are dreadful and represent a huge breakdown of our society's respect for dissenting views.
Posted by: Kynn Bartlett at April 14, 2004 06:34 PM
I suspect from your tone that this may be a generational gap we are having.
Generational gap? I'm 35. Am I too old or too young? :)
Posted by: Kynn Bartlett at April 14, 2004 06:38 PM
Good post Bill
I have to agree with Kynn's concern. THese ANSWER folks are horribly misguided. But only a nutjob would talk about killing them.
Also many of your posters equate ANSWER with democrats. I'm a liberal democrat and think they are nuts as well. However I will be voting against Bush, because of his economic policies, lack of historical context in his FP adn his lackadasial management style.
BY the way I'm 49, own 4 guns, work for a living and pay a lot more taxes than most of your posters.
Keep up the good work.
Posted by: Mark at April 14, 2004 06:53 PM
Ok - the generational gap may be simple "maturity." jokes about "mowing down hippies" are a typically young twenty-something or late-teen line of joking, though I can honestly say that I can get a chuckle out of that line of kidding (I'm 28).
I think that an important distinction between many who make off-hand comments about mowing down hippies and many of the violent urges of the other side is a sense of self-deprecation. If you read IMAO, for example, the concepts are ridiculous on their face; but oftentimes Frank J is subtlety mocking the conservative stereotypes of being violent callous assholes, as much as he is the leftists hippy moonbats.
In contrast, i've seen deadly serious far leftists suggest offhand violence like it's a novel idea. I also know that there are many conservative manifestations of this, and I have deleted a few posts that have trickled in on this thread (i may have missed some iffy ones)
But please distinguish the goofs from the serious haters; talking about "killin' foreigners" is a ridiculous parody of the conservative himself, as well as an expression of the conservative point-of-view. And sometimes it's funny.
Now as far as the Answer folks go, I do understand how some of this kidding manifests itself more, um, stridently.
I was at another protest today (will blog it later), and had a perfectly reasonable conversation with someone on "the other side." The ANSWER folks, however, really do stray into the territory of being our enemies. They are violent, intolerant, evil regime-lovin' communists. The exact type of believers that gave Stalin the green light to waste 40 million people. They are my enemy, and your enemy. You would not want to live in a world based on their value judgements.
If they ever achieved real power and the US became a less than civil society, you bet I would seek to violently oppose them. Luckily, they are marginalized by their behavior and the nature of our society. So I can just laugh.
Posted by: Bill from INDC at April 14, 2004 07:42 PM
Scrolling down and looking at the protestors was as stimulating as warm Jell-O. I would rather stick my tongue in a light socket than live a day in their brains.
Posted by: Ms Right Wing at April 14, 2004 09:55 PM
you guys are all fuck offs. Bush is a wonderful president. if you dont think so move to Iraq.
Posted by: American Soldier at April 15, 2004 12:11 AM
In contrast, i've seen deadly serious far leftists suggest offhand violence like it's a novel idea.
I don't see them that often, myself. And, of course, I am very much opposed to any such suggestion.
On the other hand, since someone mentioned Michael Friedman, I'll point out that he and his co-blogger seem to think that Tiananmen Square wasn't such a big deal after all, the pro-democracy protesters deserved what they got, and communist China is really a great place to live and work.
This bothers me as much as International ANSWER's reported support of Stalinism.
I say "reported" because I haven't seen proof that IA itself supports Stalinism as much as one of the component groups of IA does so. This is one of the problems with coalitions, and given that there are a bunch of nuts on both sides of the political spectrum, I'd think it's one that the right would understand as well. Surely there are folks on your side whose racism, sexism, white supremacy, homophobia, advocacy of political violence and other ills you object to.
Coalitions sometimes involve partnerships with unsavory people. This is why I don't join IA.
Posted by: Kynn Bartlett at April 15, 2004 01:52 PM
I can't comment on Friedman.
I would suggest that the partnerships in many of the leftist movements have more unsavory ties than those in the "Freepers," for example.
When you read about the coalition of organizations, it's disturbing. There's a pro-choice march on the 25th, I believe, it's co-sponsored by ANSWER sub-groups. I'm pro-choice; why would my position even be associated with such nuttery?
Why don't they denounce the affiliation?
Posted by: Bill from INDC Journal at April 15, 2004 03:46 PM
Those who voted for George Bush make up just over one percent of the world 's population. A few reps from this small minority decided, against evidence, that Iraq had WMC's. They are now fighting a war, which the vast majority of nations disagree with, to stop Al Qaeada which Iraq has never been associated with. The enemy,as has become increasibngly obvious, is the majority of Iraqis.
So much for democracy.
Posted by: John Haag at April 23, 2004 09:38 AM
A couple quick things.
Posted by: liberty at April 25, 2004 02:03 PM
hi, your post is very important for me, thanks
Posted by: mac_user1979 at June 16, 2004 09:04 AM