Recent Anti-War Demonstrations??
I picked this up off townhall.com today and thought you might find it interesting reading.
Tuesday, March 20, 2007
Press Ignores Fringe Nature of Demonstrations
Posted by: Michael Medved at 12:03 AM
In the last few days, demonstrators have marched across the country to mark the fourth anniversary of the beginning of the Iraq War. These protests actually deserve far more serious media coverage than they've received not because they carry some powerful message about public opinion, but rather because they expose the true nature of America's so-called "Peace Movement."
I happened to witness the demonstrations in mid-town Manhattan, since I flew with my whole family to New York City to see our oldest daughter, Sarah, starring in the world premiere of a challenging and intriguing new play (more about that subject as the week unfolds). Most press coverage noted the shockingly small turnout for Sunday's big march (USA TODAY reported just 1,000 people, led by actor Tim Robbins, on a sunny, cold day in a city of 8 million) but very few reporters made any honest attempt to portray the radicalism, the angry insanity, expressed by the demonstrators. For instance, as we approached the edge of the crowd, we took a bright red leaflet from one of the eager, bearded activists who handed them out to all the assembled multitudes. Signed by "The Progressive Labor Party," one of the sponsoring organizations of the demonstration, this inspiring manifesto declared: "Passive disagreement is not enough. What remains is to build a mass movement with the only workable solution for a profit driven wars- revolutionary communism, Join PLP as we continue to celebrate May Day commemorating the fight for the international working class and struggle for a communist revolution." To show their enthusiasm for that revolution, demonstrators brandished images of Che Guevarra and Hugo Chavez, red communist flags, black anarchist flags, red-black-green-and white Palestinian flags, signs proclaiming "Smash Capitalism" and "The Only Solution: Revolution!" along with the usual smattering of "Impeach Bush" and "Liberate Jerusalem!" and "Kill the Ruling Class so Mother Earth Can Live."
The chief sponsor for all the demonstrations across the country, the ANSWER (Act Now to Stop War and End Racism) coalition was formally associated with the unapologetically Stalinist Workers World Party, and no identifies with a new splinter group called "The Party for Socialism and Liberation." The group supports North Korea, Iran, Hezbollah, Cuba, Venezuela and virtually any other nation (no matter how thuggish) identified as anti-American.
The New York Times, to its great credit, at lest featured an interview with Brian Becker, national coordinator of the ANSWER Coalition and a former guest on my radio show. He unequivocally explained that the real purpose of the demonstrations had little to do with influencing the president or Congress. "It is about radicalizing people," he proudly declared. "You hook into a movement that exists- in this case the antiwar movement- and channel people who care about that movement and bring them into political life, the life of political activism."
Outrageously, the Associated Press, Newsday, and most other news outlets said nothing about the true radical agenda of the sponsoring organization and most of the marchers. For instance, USA Today described the demonstration in New York City without the slightest reference to ANSWER, the Progressive Labor Party, of the frequent and unmistakable displays of Communist iconography and revolutionary symbolism. Instead, they wrote: "In New York City, hundreds of protestors marched in Manhattan, some carrying signs that said, `Stop the War,' some pleading special cases with signs such as `Money for Education, Not War'.. Sunday's demonstrations came a day after thousands marched at the nation's capital, waving banners that said `US Out of Iraq Now' and `Impeach Bush.' Some also carried American flags."
Actually, as an eye witness I can certify and almost total absence of American flags in New York-and photos of the similarly feeble march on the Pentagon hardly featured any prominent display of Old Glory.
Sure, dissent can be patriotic, and dignified, and substantive, but these demonstrations looked and sounded pathetic and angry and fringy and, yes, anti-American. It's the job of a responsible press to try to note the difference among protests and to note that the bearded guy whose image the activists held aloft was Che Guevarra, not Abe Lincoln.
Tuesday, March 20, 2007
Press Ignores Fringe Nature of Demonstrations
Posted by: Michael Medved at 12:03 AM
In the last few days, demonstrators have marched across the country to mark the fourth anniversary of the beginning of the Iraq War. These protests actually deserve far more serious media coverage than they've received not because they carry some powerful message about public opinion, but rather because they expose the true nature of America's so-called "Peace Movement."
I happened to witness the demonstrations in mid-town Manhattan, since I flew with my whole family to New York City to see our oldest daughter, Sarah, starring in the world premiere of a challenging and intriguing new play (more about that subject as the week unfolds). Most press coverage noted the shockingly small turnout for Sunday's big march (USA TODAY reported just 1,000 people, led by actor Tim Robbins, on a sunny, cold day in a city of 8 million) but very few reporters made any honest attempt to portray the radicalism, the angry insanity, expressed by the demonstrators. For instance, as we approached the edge of the crowd, we took a bright red leaflet from one of the eager, bearded activists who handed them out to all the assembled multitudes. Signed by "The Progressive Labor Party," one of the sponsoring organizations of the demonstration, this inspiring manifesto declared: "Passive disagreement is not enough. What remains is to build a mass movement with the only workable solution for a profit driven wars- revolutionary communism, Join PLP as we continue to celebrate May Day commemorating the fight for the international working class and struggle for a communist revolution." To show their enthusiasm for that revolution, demonstrators brandished images of Che Guevarra and Hugo Chavez, red communist flags, black anarchist flags, red-black-green-and white Palestinian flags, signs proclaiming "Smash Capitalism" and "The Only Solution: Revolution!" along with the usual smattering of "Impeach Bush" and "Liberate Jerusalem!" and "Kill the Ruling Class so Mother Earth Can Live."
The chief sponsor for all the demonstrations across the country, the ANSWER (Act Now to Stop War and End Racism) coalition was formally associated with the unapologetically Stalinist Workers World Party, and no identifies with a new splinter group called "The Party for Socialism and Liberation." The group supports North Korea, Iran, Hezbollah, Cuba, Venezuela and virtually any other nation (no matter how thuggish) identified as anti-American.
The New York Times, to its great credit, at lest featured an interview with Brian Becker, national coordinator of the ANSWER Coalition and a former guest on my radio show. He unequivocally explained that the real purpose of the demonstrations had little to do with influencing the president or Congress. "It is about radicalizing people," he proudly declared. "You hook into a movement that exists- in this case the antiwar movement- and channel people who care about that movement and bring them into political life, the life of political activism."
Outrageously, the Associated Press, Newsday, and most other news outlets said nothing about the true radical agenda of the sponsoring organization and most of the marchers. For instance, USA Today described the demonstration in New York City without the slightest reference to ANSWER, the Progressive Labor Party, of the frequent and unmistakable displays of Communist iconography and revolutionary symbolism. Instead, they wrote: "In New York City, hundreds of protestors marched in Manhattan, some carrying signs that said, `Stop the War,' some pleading special cases with signs such as `Money for Education, Not War'.. Sunday's demonstrations came a day after thousands marched at the nation's capital, waving banners that said `US Out of Iraq Now' and `Impeach Bush.' Some also carried American flags."
Actually, as an eye witness I can certify and almost total absence of American flags in New York-and photos of the similarly feeble march on the Pentagon hardly featured any prominent display of Old Glory.
Sure, dissent can be patriotic, and dignified, and substantive, but these demonstrations looked and sounded pathetic and angry and fringy and, yes, anti-American. It's the job of a responsible press to try to note the difference among protests and to note that the bearded guy whose image the activists held aloft was Che Guevarra, not Abe Lincoln.
0
-
why do the anti-war protestors all dress up like f.a.g.s on acid in their stupid costumes and clownish makeup dancing around like retards ? 0 -
quote:Originally posted by newtgingrich
why do the anti-war protestors all dress up like f.a.g.s on acid in their stupid costumes and clownish makeup dancing around like retards ?
I think you will find they are the same groups of professional agitators that travel from city to city becoming involved in all sorts of issues and protests. Anything to avoid working for a living. Plus as the article states the american communist party is alive and well.
I blame the media for not exposing them for what they are.0 -
Don't underestimate the power that these scum can wield.
They cost Freedom of the Vietnamese people, as well as a whole lot of others.
D.0 -
quote:Originally posted by Doug Wilson
Don't underestimate the power that these scum can wield.
They cost Freedom of the Vietnamese people, as well as a whole lot of others.
D.
Isn't that the truth. I wonder how many hang out here?0 -
I could name a couple.
By the way, any news about HAIRY??
D.0 -
All these anti war/peace activist/anti hunting/enviormental activist demonstrators are the same dorks and the only thing it shows is the unemployment level in the country. 0 -
You are wrong on that one. Me and my wife both have jobs, and both are very active in Pro - Environmental, anti-globalization, anti-corporation and anti-war movement. I am willing to bet that me and my wife accomplished plenty in the time we were in USA. My wife is only 1 year in USA, and already, despite the active dislike of russians that we meet fairly often, she is a supervisor in the bank, while I am a network administrator.
As far as "shows the unemployement", trust me, I could not go to Springfield, Illinois for a pro gun ralley because I HAVE A JOB!!!
I dunno how many people who went there work, after all, it was on Wenesday, a working day.
I can't go to many of the political actions simply because I have a job, I have mortgages to pay, I have financial responcibility.
I am as likely to go on an anti imperialism rally as I am to go on a anti immigrant ralley and pro gun rally. It is just that I have a job, I can't take off whenever I want.
You can't generalize "they went to an antiwar rally, hense they are all uneployed scum, we went on a pro gun rally, and we are not uneployed scum". Let me tell you that uneployed scum sits on welfare, which you and me are paying for, and the only thing that THEY will support is increase of their portion of government cheese.
They do not care about guns: they have them anyway. They do not care about war: them folks ain't getting drafted. And, not, before you accuse me of racism, I am not talking about black folks. I am talking about all of the scum for whom you and I am paying: both black inner city ghetto and white trailer park trash.
Frankly, I do not care who sponsors the event. I don't care if Mao leads a pro gun ralley in USA, I will join it. I don't care if Arafat leads and anti immigrant rally in USA, I will join it.
I have my own interests and concerns. I will ally with anyone who addresses them.0 -
There are dirty commies about.
D.0 -
Now, now, Doug Wilson. No name calling. You don't want to be precieved as having mental and emotional maturity of an 11yo, do you?
Look, you can keep calling me a dirty commie, I can respond with calling you a fascist scumbag, but I won't do that. I can accuse you of being a militia terrorists who is planning to blow up yet another federal building and call you a Tim McWeigh wanna be. I won't do that.
It simply accomplishes nothing. There are plenty of ultra republican unemployed trailor park trash, and there are plenty of ultra liberal unemployed people. The argument here is that "our unemployed scum is better then any other uneployed scum because they are ours", I submit to you that real people have real work, and do not have much time to go to ralleys. I also submit to you that there are unemployed losers on each side. No more and no less.
Your failure to carry on a reasonable discussion without reducing yourself to namecalling shows me that: you have no other arguments,
you are uncapable of wording your arguments, you have already admit your loss.
I am on this board because I am concerned about my Gun rights.
Because, I am interested in Guns. I seen the fringe lunatics on the left, now, you are yet another exposition in my museum of fringe lunatics, you are simply on the right.0 -
No reason to get hung up on "dirty commies," they lost. Their political system (which was a military dictatorship, not true communism) collapsed, as our is doing more slowly. Few of the people who lived under that system actually liked it. Calling people "dirty commies" is about as antequated as talking about Nips and Jerrys. Get over it. 0 -
THANK YOU, HE DOG 0 -
quote:Originally posted by Tigerclaw_x
Now, now, Doug Wilson. No name calling. You don't want to be precieved as having mental and emotional maturity of an 11yo, do you?
Look, you can keep calling me a dirty commie, I can respond with calling you a fascist scumbag, but I won't do that. I can accuse you of being a militia terrorists who is planning to blow up yet another federal building and call you a Tim McWeigh wanna be. I won't do that.
It simply accomplishes nothing. There are plenty of ultra republican unemployed trailor park trash, and there are plenty of ultra liberal unemployed people. The argument here is that "our unemployed scum is better then any other uneployed scum because they are ours", I submit to you that real people have real work, and do not have much time to go to ralleys. I also submit to you that there are unemployed losers on each side. No more and no less.
Your failure to carry on a reasonable discussion without reducing yourself to namecalling shows me that: you have no other arguments,
you are uncapable of wording your arguments, you have already admit your loss.
I am on this board because I am concerned about my Gun rights.
Because, I am interested in Guns. I seen the fringe lunatics on the left, now, you are yet another exposition in my museum of fringe lunatics, you are simply on the right.
Looks like Mr Cool has returned.0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
12 comments