More Than 15,000 March in San Francisco Against Occupation

Anyone wanting to know about ANSWER can find the ugly truth in many places. It is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Workers World Party, which is financed in part by North Korea. It supports North Korea, Cuba and other failed states. The WWP is an old Stalinist "political" party that is still composed of diehard goons who evidently can't get past 1953 when Joe Stalin died. Anyone with a brain can find out what a fraud this movement is. It is composed of party hacks, old Leftists stuck in the past, raving Jew haters and their fellow travellers. These people are dangerous, and I assure you when Bush is reelected and the Left is discredited, they have the potential for great violence, sabotage, and treason against our government. Be warned. They are being constantly watched.

My post was removed by the fascists at indymedia because it exposed the misguided ventures of A.N.S.W.E.R and indymedia. It wasn't offensive or contain anything but fact, yet it was still removed. I guess the sheep at indymedia are affraid of the truth.

Of course, this post will be removed too. And this why the radical left will never achieve anything.

>>>Anyone wanting to know about ANSWER can find the ugly truth in many places. It is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Workers World Party, which is financed in part by North Korea. It supports North Korea, Cuba and other failed states. The WWP is an old Stalinist "political" party that is still composed of diehard goons who evidently can't get past 1953 when Joe Stalin died. Anyone with a brain can find out what a fraud this movement is. It is composed of party hacks, old Leftists stuck in the past, raving Jew haters and their fellow travellers. These people are dangerous, and I assure you when Bush is reelected and the Left is discredited, they have the potential for great violence, sabotage, and treason against our government. Be warned. They are being constantly watched.<<<

You know, you really should stop watching Fox News. Yes, the organisers of the marches we've seen looked terribly dangerous to us. We were just scared to death of them. They looked like extremely violent people to us. <Sigh!> Here we go again with more scare tactics from right-wing fundamentalist fanatics "stuck in the past."

It's clear to us at q2112.com that the anti-war movement is having an effect, to cause you to write the drivel you wrote about A.N.S.W.E.R. If we weren't having a bearing on things, you wouldn't have wasted your precious time posting on this forum in your attempt to smear the "Left."

It seems that lock-step repugnant Bush supporters don't give a damn about the fact that this Bush LIED repeatedly to the world and that people are dying each and every in Iraq, but you didn't care to say a word about that.

And by the way, let us educate you:

Bush can't be re-elected. Think about it.

Peace,

q2112.com

I noticed you couldn't refute any of the comments about A.N.S.W.E.R. All you did was deflect the issue and went off on some tangent about right-wingers. With that kind of logic, you guys will continue to be a minority, isolating yourselves to a small, insignificant group. Supporters of A.N.S.W.E.R and like-minded ilk need to get off the notion that if we don't support your misguided rallies, then we are automatically Bush supporters. Couldn't be farther from the truth. I can't stand Bush, but I can't stand anti-American organizations like A.N.S.W.E.R who lie and distort the truth while, painting themselves as some concerned body of peace and hope.

I remember the first A.N.S.W.E.R rally in February, where many protesters who were carrying A.N.S.W.E.R signs were screaming about how the troops are murderers and monkey's for the "Bush Regime." Now, thery're saying we want our troops home, like they give a shit for the well being of the soldiers. Total hypocrites.

The issue here is that A.N.S.W.E.R could care less about the war, the troops or even human rights. Their using an anti-war platform to flock the sheep into thinking they really care. They don't. Their agenda is clear, to destroy the fabric of American society. Given their track record of supporting tyrannical dictators, how can you defend such a horrible organization?

I never saw anything like that and I was at all of the antiwar rallies. Even during the first ANSWER rallies focusing on Iraq I remember seeing groups like Veterans for Peace etc... There are even pictures on this site of Veterans groups at early rallies.

>>Their agenda is clear, to destroy the fabric of American society>>

That's Great! America must die so we can live!

Bush and Co. are doing a fine job of ruining the fabric of American society. They don't need Answer to help them do so.

>>>I noticed you couldn't refute any of the comments about A.N.S.W.E.R. All you did was deflect the issue and went off on some tangent about right-wingers.<<<

First of all, we don't go off on tangents. We didn't respond to your allegations about A.N.S.W.E.R. and why should we? If you have a hard-on for this particular group, then go for it. They've done an excellent job at organising the marches/protests. Period.

What group do you support? Name it.

>>>With that kind of logic, you guys will continue to be a minority, isolating yourselves to a small, insignificant group.<<<

Well fine, if that's what you believe. Why does this concern you? Obviously, you must not believe what you say otherwise you wouldn't be here.

>>>Supporters of A.N.S.W.E.R and like-minded ilk need to get off the notion that if we don't support your misguided rallies, then we are automatically Bush supporters. Couldn't be farther from the truth. I can't stand Bush, but I can't stand anti-American organizations like A.N.S.W.E.R who lie and distort the truth while, painting themselves as some concerned body of peace and hope.<<<

What truth are you striving to express to the masses? What is your definition of "anti-American?" Were those involved in the Boston Tea Party "anti-American" in your mind?

>>>I remember the first A.N.S.W.E.R rally in February, where many protesters who were carrying A.N.S.W.E.R signs were screaming about how the troops are murderers and monkey's for the "Bush Regime." Now, thery're saying we want our troops home, like they give a shit for the well being of the soldiers. Total hypocrites.<<<

Really? We've been to all of the major marches and we've not see what you speak of nor heard anyone saying that, nor can we find pictures of such things. Can you?

Frankly, we don't supports the troops in Iraq because we don't approve of what they're doing, so we say "support the troops" by bringing them home and keeping them alive.

>>>The issue here is that A.N.S.W.E.R could care less about the war, the troops or even human rights. Their using an anti-war platform to flock the sheep into thinking they really care. They don't. Their agenda is clear, to destroy the fabric of American society. Given their track record of supporting tyrannical dictators, how can you defend such a horrible organization?<<<

And as far as A.N.S.W.E.R., you really think that ***one*** organisation can "destroy the fabric of American society?" Your concern is extremely misplaced. This Bush is currently destroying the fabric of "American" society and the planet, not International ANSWER.

As an analogy, International Answer is as likely to "destroy the fabric of America" as gays and lesbians are likely to destroy the "institution of marriage." What nonsense and cliches!

In our opinion, the people of International A.N.S.W.E.R. are the true partriots. At least they're doing something to end the war/occupation in Iraq and this Bush's illegitimate occupation of the White House.

What are you doing?

Start your own group. Start your own website if you're so disgruntled with ANSWER.

The protests in the UK have shrunk much more yet nobody is attacking the groups that organized the million plus person marchs on London during the start of the war. The reason protests have shrunk is because the number of people opposed to the war has reached a level where it just doesnt seem worthwhile to protest anymore. Everyone knows that Blair is unpopular and the war was wrong, so what does taking to the street achieve?

I think its good there still are protests in the US and UK since it helps keep organizations alive for when there is something new to bring to the medias attention. The point of street protests is to bring an issue to the media's attention. There is now antiwar antioccupation news on every TV channel every night (and the images are starting to look more and more like Viet Nam) Protests will begin again on a massive scale when people have a better sense of what point things are at (will the US withdraw troops or will this be a 15 year occupation, will US casualities continue at the current level or rise to a point where Congress demands the war to end...)

quoting you "The reason protests have shrunk is because the number of people opposed to the war has reached a level where it just doesnt seem worthwhile to protest anymore."

Reality Response: You are blind and illogical and just plain wrong. Do you think the protesters of the Vietnam war "petered out" due to their stand becoming popular? Jeeesh YOU ARE SO WRONG! When people BELIEVE in a stadn, they do something about it. The fact is, an INCREASING majority of people disagree with the protestors message. Anything else is self-serving spin. The protests in Washington was an order of magnitude less than expected. Some say there were more police, reporters, street vendors and observers than protestors.
In SF, more anti-Semites used the opportunity to parade around with their anti-Israel agenda than were there to decry the current presidency.

get real... and stop lying to yourself, that will make it easier for you to not place lies on Indy

quoting you "The reason protests have shrunk is because the number of people opposed to the war has reached a level where it just doesnt seem worthwhile to protest anymore."

Reality Response: You are blind and illogical and just plain wrong. Do you think the protesters of the Vietnam war "petered out" due to their stand becoming popular? Jeeesh YOU ARE SO WRONG! When people BELIEVE in a stadn, they do something about it. The fact is, an INCREASING majority of people disagree with the protestors message. Anything else is self-serving spin. The protests in Washington was an order of magnitude less than expected. Some say there were more police, reporters, street vendors and observers than protestors.
In SF, more anti-Semites used the opportunity to parade around with their anti-Israel agenda than were there to decry the current presidency.

get real... and stop lying to yourself, that will make it easier for you to not place lies on Indy

Explain why antiwar protests have died down in the UK and other countries. Opposition to the war in the UK is clearly at an all-time high and the groups organizing the protests there are not the same as the groups organizing protests here.

There are a few big differences between this war and Vietnam.

-First of all, the amount of people in the US who oppose this war is larger during most of the Vietnam war and the media has become more critical of the war earlier on. Even during the last years of Vietnam the public was polarized; while there is an element of polarization now just about everyone thinks the war has been going badly and wants the US out soon.

-Secondly, there is no draft and so far US casualties have been a lot lower. The immediacy of the threat for most Americans was a lot more real during the last years of Vietnam and that turned opposition into anger.

-Thirdly, unity in opposition to the war hides a lot of divisions in what people support next. A demand for the US to leave Iraq could mean many things. Some people support a UN force taking over from the US and organizing elections. Some people support a division of Iraq into three separate countries with each being allowed to choose its own government through elections. Some people want the US to leave and let the groups in Iraq fight it out for themselves.
During Vietnam an end was more clear. There was a clear group that would take over the country if the US stopped fighting.

Its easy to blame ANSWER. Personally I have a lot of issues with them. But the complaints about demonstration size are misplaced. If ANSWER were more mainstream, fewer people would show up. This is the Bay Area, a crowd of 30,000 can be solely of anarchists, socialists and communists. If you drive away the base that shows up to every protest (and does most of the work to advertise protests) you would probably get fewer people. Appealing to the political center can alienate people and make one unpopular (look at Davis and the lack of any organized support for the Democrats on any college campuses during the recall)

What is the purpose of large political marchs? The only two things I can think of are
to show support for a cause and to help groups network.
After months of protests people are not really showing up to learn anything from speakers.

To all those out there complaining that ANSWER protests get in the way of other types of protests (more mainstream or more radical) I have a few questions for you. When ANSWER decided not to organize protests over the summer, where were the other groups that took that opportunity to organize their own large rallies? While ANSWER does help organize monthly protests, is there anything stopping another group from doing the same? If you have connections and a good idea to draw in a larger crowd go for it, I cant quite see how ANSWER or any other group is getting in the way. I would love to see many different types of protests against the war and occupation. Radicals may not show up for a too mainstream one and liberals may not like more radical protests so perhaps both types of protests are needed; the problem is that while mainstream liberals have more money than radicals they don’t seem to be willing to do the work required to organize large protests (its actually a little confusing since during the 80s there were mainstream media events like Farm Aid and concerts against aparthied but now mainstream, types will complain about protests but don’t seem willing to spend the money or energy to create them)

two wrongs don't make a right, if we don't stand to be one we don't stand at all

two wrongs don't make a right, if we don't stand to be one we don't stand at all

two wrongs don't make a right, if we don't stand to be one we don't stand at all

Millions came out prior to the initial bombing of Iraq in the hopes that we actually live in a democracy, that what we say matters, that our leaders will get the message that we do not support this heinous war. We came out, some of us, because we hoped we could stop it with a groundswell of opposition. Others, like myself, hoped we could stop it, knowing we probably couldn't, given the fact that even our VOTES for President were ignored, even purged, but we couldn't stay home. We have to stand up and be counted.
Our numbers dropped after the war (at least in public demonstrations), I believe, because so many people were disheartened that we didn't stop the mayhem, that we really DON'T live in a democracy. We felt betrayed and depressed.
A lot of us were soccer moms and average blue collar (and white collar) people who had never done this before and actually thought we could effect change.
The more seasoned activists among us know the score, know that it's a long term struggle, but many who came out didn't have that historical long view and were asserting their rights and their voices for the first time.
It IS demoralizing to find out that the current administration doesn't give a damn what we think or say and insulted us by calling us a "focus group".
I heard many people say "What's the point? They're gonna do whatever they want anyway" and stayed home.
It is this demoralization of the average person that we must not ignore or discount because it is real and it is understandable.