TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Bush's UK State Visit
Pages (3): [1] 2 3 »
Bush's UK State Visit
awww british hippies are angry
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20031111/ts_nm/bush_britain_dc_1
I say STFU considering America gave more their freedom than they did 60 years ago.
Re: Bush's UK State Visit
| quote: |
| Originally posted by 'mju:zik awww british hippies are angry http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm...sh_britain_dc_1 I say STFU considering America gave more their freedom than they did 60 years ago. |
http://www.well.com/user/hlr/texts/democracy.html
Re: Re: Bush's UK State Visit
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Trancer-X [It sounds like more than half of it's citizenry must be what you call "hippies." |
Funny how it's usually the very small, yet very vocal minority that draws the majority of the attention to itself.
Re: Re: Bush's UK State Visit
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Trancer-X A poll in Tuesday's Times newspaper showed 60 percent of British voters strongly disapprove of Bush's handling of Iraq -- and that anti-Bush feeling is particularly high among women. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Shakka Funny how it's usually the very small, yet very vocal minority that draws the majority of the attention to itself. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by DrUg_Tit0 Funny how you tend to miss the facts that are not convinient for you. If you'd read better, you'd see 60% are against Bush's policy. The 100 000 people protesting is a large number. Not all of those who disagree with Bush are attending the protests. |
President Seems Unable to Bear the Sight or Sound of Dissent
By ROBYN E. BLUMNER
� St. Petersburg Times, published October 13, 2002
President Bush seems to think bullying is the only way to deal with dissent. Bush has so much trouble articulating a defense for his own policies, so little capacity to formulate a reasoned response, that he resorts to shibboleths, name-calling or worse, using authorities to shut down his critics.
Classic Bush was his attack on Senate Democrats who refused to go along with his plan to strip workers at the new Department of Homeland Security of civil service rights. He quipped that senators were "not interested in the security of the American people."
Of course, U.S. senators can take care of themselves. Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle made quick work of Bush's scurrilous claims, pointing out to the former Texas National Guardsman that a number of Senate Democrats were actually injured fighting for the security of our country.
But there are plenty of regular Joes out there who don't have access to the halls of power or C-Span, whose criticism of the administration has been sidelined by law enforcement.
In town after town where Bush has come to raise money or make a speech, his venue and the route leading up to it have been purged of protesters. This is accomplished through the combined efforts of local policing agencies and the secret service, which scour the crowd for any hint of opposition. Anyone with an anti-Bush sign is relegated into what is euphemistically called a Free Speech or Demonstration Zone -- a swath of land usually off the main thoroughfare and chained off so as to make it virtually impossible for the targets of the protest to read the signs or hear the chants. Those with pro-Bush signs are often treated very differently. They are free to cheerlead the president as he rides toward his engagement, which typically is further sanitized by being invitation-only.
This kind of censorship is indicative of a leader who lacks confidence in his own powers of persuasion and the legitimacy of his course. Why else would Bush be so interested in hiding evidence of dissent within the American populace?
The Secret Service claims that security concerns justify the use of segregated zones for protesters. That's a lot of bunk. As long as demonstrators do not impede the flow of traffic they have a right to be anywhere the general public is invited. Think about the freedom we would be giving up if police could cage anyone who wants to exercise his or her First Amendment rights.
As Bill Neel of Butler, Penn., says, "(Under the Constitution,) the whole country is a free speech zone." Neel, 65, a retired steelworker, was arrested on Labor Day for stepping outside the fence where he and a small group of protesters were cordoned off as the president made his way by motorcade for a speech to union carpenters. His sign read: "The Bushes must truly love the poor -- they've made so many of us." Bush supporters waving signs and flags were allowed to freely line the route.
Neel was charged with disorderly conduct and has a hearing on Oct. 31 at which he intends to fight the charge with the help of the Pittsburgh Chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union. His story is part of a disturbing national pattern.
Peter Buckley, a 45-year-old Democratic candidate for Congress in Oregon, expressed his frustration with the Free Speech Zones in a commentary for the Oregonian. In August, Buckley was part of a group of people who had turned out to protest Bush's economic policies among other things. They were herded into a dirt compound surrounded by a six-foot cyclone fence, 200 yards from the arena where Bush spoke to 5,000 invited guests.
"We were not allowed anywhere near any kind of position where the president, or the media which follows him, would see or hear us," Buckley wrote. "What is happening everywhere Mr. Bush goes is wrong. The effort being made to hide political opposition in this country is more than cowardly. It's un-American."
In Tampa, three people, including two grandmothers, were arrested last year at a Bush rally when they held up opposition signs outside the far-flung demonstration zone. Once again, people with supportive signs went unmolested. The charges against the three were later dropped as baseless, and a civil rights suit is expected to be filed within weeks against the Tampa Police Department.
In the past, courts have ruled protest pens invalid. Americans have a right to address grievances to their president when he appears in public, even if that ruins a particular "photo op."
My advice to Bush is to thicken his skin and work on the sagacity of his arguments.
� Copyright 2003 St. Petersburg Times. All rights reserved
http://www.sptimes.com/2002/10/13/n...ems_unabl.shtml
Re: Re: Re: Bush's UK State Visit
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Trancer-X Well, having consistently scored in the 99th and 99+ %ile in reading comprehension, I read unequivocally and meticulously well. Thank you, bendejo I doubt that everyone sharing their sentiments are going to be protesting. I'm sure that even the most incognizant individuals would have to agree that not everyone is an activist. |
Re: Re: Re: Re: Bush's UK State Visit
| quote: |
| Originally posted by 'mju:zik ."up to 100,000 protesters vowing to take to the streets" i hope that posting your sat percentage score on the internet gives you a nice warm bundle of self worth. obviously you had trouble understanding that by hippies I meant protesters. disagreeing about something is one thing, marching for your beliefs makes you a hippy |
Re: Re: Re: Re: Bush's UK State Visit
| quote: |
| Originally posted by 'mju:zik ."up to 100,000 protesters vowing to take to the streets" i hope that posting your sat percentage score on the internet gives you a nice warm bundle of self worth. obviously you had trouble understanding that by hippies I meant protesters. disagreeing about something is one thing, marching for your beliefs makes you a hippy |
Bush has so much trouble articulating a defense for his own policies, so little capacity to formulate a reasoned response, that he resorts to shibboleths, name-calling, (...).
| quote: |
As Bill Neel of Butler, Penn., says, "(Under the Constitution,) the whole country is a free speech zone." Neel, 65, a retired steelworker, was arrested on Labor Day for stepping outside the fence where he and a small group of protesters were cordoned off as the president made his way by motorcade for a speech to union carpenters. Neel was charged with disorderly conduct and has a hearing on Oct. 31 at which he intends to fight the charge with the help of the Pittsburgh Chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union. His story is part of a disturbing national pattern. |
| quote: |
Peter Buckley, a 45-year-old Democratic candidate for Congress in Oregon, expressed his frustration with the Free Speech Zones in a commentary for the Oregonian. In August, Buckley was part of a group of people who had turned out to protest Bush's economic policies among other things. They were herded into a dirt compound surrounded by a six-foot cyclone fence, 200 yards from the arena where Bush spoke to 5,000 invited guests. "We were not allowed anywhere near any kind of position where the president, or the media which follows him, would see or hear us," Buckley wrote. "What is happening everywhere Mr. Bush goes is wrong. The effort being made to hide political opposition in this country is more than cowardly. It's un-American." |
| quote: |
In Tampa, three people, including two grandmothers, were arrested last year at a Bush rally when they held up opposition signs outside the far-flung demonstration zone. |
Re: Bush's UK State Visit
| quote: |
| Originally posted by 'mju:zik awww british hippies are angry http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm...sh_britain_dc_1 I say STFU considering America gave more their freedom than they did 60 years ago. |
It really does not matter what George W. Bush, says anymore, Many Europeans have put on their own blinders, as they so often like to remind Americans of with Israel especially. If Bush was to call for the ratification of Kyoto tomorrow, they would probably protest that it was too late to do it, if he was to pull out of Iraq they would say what a disaster to run away from the Iraquis, all I have heard from many people is blatant Bush bashing, which serves 0 purpose. If half the efforts were devoted to also criticizing dictators in Asia, the Middle East or certainly Africa, maybe I could see their purpose. Do not for one second get me wrong I am pissed as hell with the events in Iraq, with no weapons found, lives lost and continued instability, but no one can question that the time has come to move on and rebuild the f-ing country. If genuine concern lies with the Iraquis, rather than with anti-American sentiments, the faster Iraq is rebuilt, the faster the U.S. can get the hell out of there. I just hope that many drunken yobs won't take to the streets of London and wreck the beautiful streets, is G.W. Bush really worth that. Protest peacefully, make your point in number of demonstrators and go on back with life.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Bush's UK State Visit
| quote: |
| Originally posted by 'mju:zik ."up to 100,000 protesters vowing to take to the streets" i hope that posting your sat percentage score on the internet gives you a nice warm bundle of self worth. obviously you had trouble understanding that by hippies I meant protesters. disagreeing about something is one thing, marching for your beliefs makes you a hippy |
| quote: |
| I might of read what you said wrongly, however do you think it was only America who won WW2? Do you think of people from other countries who gave their lives so you can be free? |
Re: Re: Bush's UK State Visit
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Dj O'Callaghan And your last line that post, your refering to WW2 right? And your saying the Americans gave British people their freedom? If your saying what I think you are I suggest you stop speaking out of your fucking arse lad, the British fought for their OWN freedom! |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by tathi i thought the war started when tom hanks and the americans took the beach????? |
| quote: |
all I meant is that more American troops were killed in combat. |
. I've spent godless amounts of time trouncing arguments undermining US committments/acheivements in that war and I could spend the same amount of time outlining other countries' efforts/acheivements that were also critical. It's the one war I've studied the most so I'm more than willing to argue any point about it.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by occrider It's the one war I've studied the most so I'm more than willing to argue any point about it. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by 'mju:zik unless you can argue that the British lost more ppl to combat it doesnt really matter, now does it? I'm not saying that the war couldn't have been won w/o their help, but in the most real of measures (human life), America gave more than Britain (and A LOT less than the red army). |
| quote: |
on a sidenote, it's interesting how much things turned around the week Germany declared war on the US, almost spooky really. |
there's a good doco floating around on the lancaster dam busters, some analysts believe that was a major epoch in ww2
| quote: |
| Monday, Nov. 17, 2003 The George And Tony Show Could Get Wild Blair is looking forward to Bush's visit to Britain next week. So are the protesters By J.F.O. MCALLISTER It seemed like a great idea at the time. Two summers ago, Elizabeth II decided to invite Bush 43 for a formal state visit, the first for an American President since Woodrow Wilson called on her grandfather in 1918. Prime Minister Tony Blair's government was behind the idea, confident that lots of royal folderol � a white-tie dinner, a ride by the Queen and the President in a horse-drawn carriage � would put a big, emotional exclamation point on the transatlantic bonds Blair has nourished. But now, a week before Air Force One is scheduled to touch down, Bush's journey is starting to look like a cross between The Perfect Storm and Chevy Chase Goes to London. All police vacations have been canceled so that some 4,000 officers can contain anti-Bush protests organized by the Stop the War Coalition, which mobilized a record 1 million marchers for a demonstration last February. The group's website sports an unflattering photo of Bush, complete with instructions on how to photocopy it at 141% magnification to produce the right dimensions for an effigy. Plans call for toppling a mesh statue of Bush, Saddam style, in Trafalgar Square on Nov. 20. The President will be kept as far away from protesters as the Secret Service can manage � he won't join the Queen for her carriage ride after all � but as a U.S. official says, "There's a lot of fear of surprises." Because Blair is so articulate and stalwart, Bush has always got a boost from the Prime Minister's visits to the U.S. But Bush's reciprocal gesture can only hurt Blair. The PM's approval ratings have slumped, largely because of his decision to stand with Bush on Iraq. There aren't any weapons of mass destruction to vindicate Blair's key argument that Saddam Hussein was furiously producing them. Constant strife and death in Iraq are making the British public uneasy about Bush's competence and fearful that Britain's nearly 10,000 troops in Iraq will be killed in increasing numbers. (Twenty-three have died since Bush declared an end to major hostilities on May 1.) In a recent MORI poll of British adults, half the respondents said they wanted Blair to resign right away. It's no wonder he has been straining to downplay Iraq in favor of domestic issues. The strategy has been helped by the fact that the British media have lately been focusing on upheavals in the Conservative Party, a lurid child murder and, last week, the strange tale of Prince Charles' denial � without disclosing the original allegation because a court injunction prohibits that � of a racy claim about him by a former aide with a history of alcoholism. Never mind: next week all of Fleet Street will be awash with coverage of the person a U.S. diplomat ruefully dubbed "the toxic Texan," whose handling of international affairs is panned by two-thirds of Brits. White House officials know their boss is making life awkward for his First Friend. "Maybe they'll keep the lights off and pretend they're not home," quips a Bush aide. On the contrary, Blair's solution to his p.r. problem is to offer a full-throated advocacy of close U.S.-British ties. Far from keeping Bush under wraps for fear of gaffes, Blair is encouraging him to grant interviews with lots of local media. A trip to Blair's home constituency in the northeast is planned to showcase more of the President. "Anyone who thinks the Prime Minister is going to be apologetic about his relationship with Bush and the U.S. totally misunderstands his view of them � both personal and strategic," says a Blair aide. But it's going to be a nerve-racking three days. "It's all thin ice," says a Foreign Office official. One element of unpredictability: Bush hates � really hates � the fuss and formality in which state visits are steeped. The last time he dined with the Queen � in 1992 at his father's White House, wearing cowboy boots emblazoned with GOD SAVE THE QUEEN � he asked if she had any black sheep in her family. "Don't answer that!" his mother Barbara interjected, trying to avoid embarrassment. This time he's the President, the man in charge. Whatever Bush does, Blair will have to live with it. With reporting by John F. Dickerson/Washington and Helen Gibson/London |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by occrider What? The battle of Moscow? Technically the week before ... but it was merely one decisive battle out of many on the eastern front. Nothing spooky that I can tell. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by 'mju:zik I thought you said you studied this war?? A few things happened. Germany declared on 11 December, four days after Pearl Harbor, three days after the US & UK declared on Japan. A few days before that, Moscow was won. What is more interesting, however, is that Hitler (not exactly a great military mind) took control of his armed forces on the 19 December. Nearly all WWII historians view this point in History as the real turn in the war. IMO, he still could have won if he had a little luck and A LOT less ego (Stalingrad, among other things). |
| quote: |
These aren't even all the things that happened. But of course you know everything RIGHT?? you're TA's historian?? |
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.