London Burning by piratenews

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-14450248

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, August 8, 2011 1:21 PM

http://www.socialistworld.net/doc/5219

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, August 8, 2011 1:24 PM

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, August 8, 2011 1:30 PM

Beir bua agus beannacht

What a rutting mess, rioting is so weird, I mean, why? I know why from a sociaology standpoint, but ... why?
Again what a rutting mess. People ought to be ashamed of themselves.

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, August 8, 2011 4:12 PM

http://www.good.is/post/people-are-awesome-watch-this-badass-london-la
dy-stand-up-to-the-rioters/

I love this lady. Brave and awesome. Be warned about language content. She's mad as hell.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, August 8, 2011 4:20 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

People ought to be ashamed of themselves.

Yeah, they should be like people in the US where people being shot by police is SOP and not worthy of notice, unless of course they are schizophrenic, white, and the child of a former police chief, in which case people quietly gather to light candles, then go home. Because if you got shot, it MUST have been your fault.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, August 8, 2011 4:22 PM

I agree with the angry lady. Burning down shops and houses belonging to your neighbours is a hell of a way to protest.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, August 8, 2011 4:45 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

No tidy protest in the US ever brought change. Maybe it is the same in England. They might need to aim in a different direction.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, August 8, 2011 4:59 PM

DMAANLILEILTT

That is all.

"I really am ruggedly handsome, aren't I?"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, August 8, 2011 5:04 PM

Keep the Shiny side up

Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
No tidy protest in the US ever brought change.

Womens' sufferage? Civil rights movement? Gay rights? Pretty much the classic examples of non-violent protest (on the part of the protestors, anyway).

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, August 8, 2011 5:08 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
No tidy protest in the US ever brought change. Maybe it is the same in England. They might need to aim in a different direction.

Women's rights? Anti vietnam? Civil rights? You think the hard change was brought about by trashing stuff. What about all the peaceful protests? The passionate writing and oration? Civil disobedience is quite quite different to rioting.

Venting your anger through violence is easy and it might make people sit up and watch for 15 seconds, but it doesn't a;ways bring change, and more often or not, it brings change for the worst. Violence begets more violence.

From Gandhi through Mandela, the world changes for the better through peace and compassion.

I believe it and I live it.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, August 8, 2011 5:09 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:
Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
No tidy protest in the US ever brought change.

Womens' sufferage? Civil rights movement? Gay rights? Pretty much the classic examples of non-violent protest (on the part of the protestors, anyway).

"Keep the Shiny side up"

Jeez geez, you beat me to it. Thought I had double posted. Except I forgot about gay rights.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, August 8, 2011 5:13 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

In an attempt to rally national support for the Anthony Amendment, Alice Paul organized a huge parade down Pennsylvania Avenue on the day before President Woodrow Wilson's first inauguration. But the peaceful parade degenerated into a riot when thousands of hostile male spectators broke into the ranks of the marchers and tried to block their passage. Essentially, the women had to fight their way down Pennsylvania Avenue, with the help of men who supported the women's suffrage movement. Troops had to be called in to restore order, and hundreds of people were hospitalized.

In September of 1962, James Meredith sought to enroll as the first black student in the history of the University of Mississippi (Ole Miss). His enrollment triggered substantial resistance from the University, the community of Oxford Mississippi, and the Governor of the state, Ross Barnett. As a result, President John F. Kennedy ordered federal marshals to ensure Meredith's right to enroll and to protect him as he moved to the campus. On the evening of the Meredith's enrollment, President John F. Kennedy spoke to the American people in a live television address.
As Kennedy was speaking, violence broke out on the campus and in Oxford. President Kennedy ultimately ordered federal troops to Oxford to quell the riots which injured over 300 and killed two.

The Stonewall riots were a series of spontaneous, violent demonstrations against a police raid that took place in the early morning hours of June 28, 1969, at the Stonewall Inn, in the Greenwich Village neighborhood of New York City. They are frequently cited as the first instance in American history when people in the homosexual community fought back against a government-sponsored system that persecuted sexual minorities, and they have become the defining event that marked the start of the gay rights movement in the United States and around the world.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, August 8, 2011 5:18 PM

Were they not examples of violence against peaceful protesters?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, August 8, 2011 5:22 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

Not the Stonewall Riots. And people fought back. It was most definitely NOT non-violent.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, August 8, 2011 5:23 PM

Keep the Shiny side up

Quote:
Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
Jeez geez, you beat me to it. Thought I had double posted. Except I forgot about gay rights.

Pretty obvious response. A 'gimmie' for great minds (and mine too).

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, August 8, 2011 5:26 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

Too bad historical facts prove you wrong.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, August 8, 2011 5:28 PM

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)

I don't support the rioters in their violence, but I understand where the impulse comes from, and I'd bet we've all felt some form of it at one time or another.

It comes from the feeling of helplessness in the face of overwhelming odds. It comes from watching as someone is beaten, clubbed, or killed in front of you, and when the response you get from the supposed "authorities" is that (a) it never happened, and (b) if you insist that it did, you're next. It comes from the anger of being asked to "share the sacrifice" while others with so much more are literally HANDED stacks and stacks of free money.

At that point, there is occasionally a little voice which says, quietly and with barely contained anger, overly enunciating every single syllable of every single word, "What. Ever. You. Take. From. Me. I. Guar-An-Fuck-Ing-Tee. You. THIS: I. WILL. MAKE. IT. COST. YOU. MORE."

This is a few people voicing frustration, telling the system that they've given up all they can, and if the system is going to demand more, take more, then they are going to make sure to tip the balance of the exchequer's accounting books. It's a group of people saying to authority, "I have a net worth of one pound sixpence. Take from me what you will, and the only threat you have is that you can throw me in jail, give me healthcare and education, three hots and a cot, room and board, and legal assistance. And I can make it cost you far more than you can take from me."

A few people say it, and a handful more hear it and think about it, and a few of them say it, and suddenly you have a mass of people who feel they've nothing left to lose, and who have decided that if the system is really this broken, then why the hell not LITERALLY break it into pieces and burn it to the ground?

That's where the impulse comes from.

I understand it, but I hope it doesn't come here. Or, if it does, let it start in the gated communities and country clubs, where it can perhaps do some good. ;)

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, August 8, 2011 5:30 PM

Keep the Shiny side up

Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
Not the Stonewall Riots. And people fought back. It was most definitely NOT non-violent.

But while it, along with the violent police response, was a seminal event in gay rights, it was the steady non-violent series of protests, gay pride events, etc. that got things to where they are today. In general, violence, like the riots after Dr. King was killed, didn't accomplish anything useful.

I'd say that the violence of authority against peaceful sufferage, civil rights, Vietnam war, and gay protests had more to do with changing attitudes than any violence by protestors.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, August 8, 2011 5:30 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
Not the Stonewall Riots. And people fought back. It was most definitely NOT non-violent.

You included stonewall in your edit, so my reply didn't make much sense.

You asked if tidy protests ever worked. I believe I answered them. I'm not a big believer in people taking to violence to express their anger or outrage, be it in protest, or their everyday life. I'm not quite a pacifist because I do believe there is a time to defend yourself from the violence of others, but defensive violence is quite different to offensive violence and even then I'd be exhausting all other avenues first.

Once you cross into the violence territory its hard to come back.

And again, reading back. Geezer is saying it better than me.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, August 8, 2011 5:35 PM

Keep the Shiny side up

Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
Too bad historical facts prove you wrong.

Name a social change in the U.S. that was caused exclusively or mostly by violence on the part of the people protesting for it.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, August 8, 2011 5:48 PM

Yup, if you want violence to work in your favor, you have to be willing to have it inflicted upon you by the authorities, in full view of the media. You have to be nonviolent, and have violence thrust upon you, it seems; only then will people begin to question the authorities and their actions.

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, August 8, 2011 5:49 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

Geezer

Your historical view is stuck on 'quaint'.

'Quaint' women in 'quaint' long white dresses and 'quaint' white porkpie hats marching behind a big banner, 'quaint' black folk singing and marching, 'quaint' gays having outlandish parades. When tptb don't think they have anything to lose, they give nothing up. You can politely parade and sweetly sing and flaunt your costume all you want - unless there is the threat of muscle if those demands are not met - nothing happens. You of all people should know that: desegregation was accomplished at the end of the federal gun.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, August 8, 2011 5:57 PM

Beir bua agus beannacht

This is an interesting discussion. Kiki, I agree with you that wanton willy nilly police shootings are absolutely not okay and that people need to stand up for themselves and say it is NOT okay. A lil violence if protesters are attacked by the cops, defending oneself and each other, is fine, makes perfect sense. But burning down buildings and wanton distruction? That doesn't seem productive to me, not to mention it takes away from the general public's sympathy and empathy for the protestors, who are now rioters. You're right that history is ugly sometimes Kiki, I don't dispute that. But rioting of this sort is not seen by most as a positive way to get your message across and affect change.

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, August 8, 2011 5:59 PM

Keep the Shiny side up

Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
Geezer

Your historical view is stuck on 'quaint'.

I think not.

Nevertheless, name a social change in the U.S. that was caused exclusively or mostly by violence on the part of the people protesting for it.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, August 8, 2011 6:05 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

Been through the LA riots myself - CERTainly an UNcertain time. Mostly though it was thousands of people looting b/c, hell, with all those people who's going to stop you? The small stores that got burned down - were stores that generally had been ripping people off for years and had very poor community relations - as later investigation and testimony showed.

FWIW - that is my experience with large-scale rioting.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, August 8, 2011 6:21 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

Geezer

Biggest march you never heard of - they politely marched, cleaned up the trash and went home. Oh, and got nowhere.

2004 March for Women's Lives

The April 25, 2004, March for Women's Lives drew a record 1.15 million people to Washington, D.C., to protect and advance access to a full range of reproductive health care options, including abortion, birth control and emergency contraception.

Otherwise, here's a Wiki link for you as an example and some questions - which marches were non-violent, which do you remember, and which accomplished anything at all.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_protest_marches_on_Washington,_D.
C.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, August 8, 2011 6:49 PM

FREMDFIRMA

Quote:
Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
I agree with the angry lady. Burning down shops and houses belonging to your neighbours is a hell of a way to protest.

I concur, it's nonsensical and counterproductive.
That and it's just plain MEAN, ain't no call or cause for it, and to do it is to make those involved as bad or worse than those they're supposedly protesting against.

Mikey is dead-bang right about the impulse though, problem is that impulse comes right back up against a pre-programmed fear and obedience, and it all goes to hell between their ears and they don't know what to do so they take it out right then and there on those around them.

What they lack, is DIRECTION, something which can be ever so helpfully applied via one smartass with a megaphone - but honestly, the truth ?

You're much better off if that DOESN'T happen, cause the loss of life and property from these riots, when they finally calm down, will be far, far less than what WOULD happen if the powers that be were *actually* realistically threatened and cut loose the hounds of war upon their own people - do you have ANY IDEA what it'd be like if several strike aircraft clusterbombed a street packed with rioters ?
*shakes head*

That's why I strive so hard to work with other methods, other tactics, going toe to toe is not only counterproductive, unless you CAN fight the army, and if so, why not just take over ?

Noncompliance is the first method, sabotage another, so too is economics, but violence should be reserved for single individuals only, and for specific reasons ONLY **AFTER** failure to address the matter through channels.
(For Example: I would have supported a violent mob kicking down the doors of Congress and forcibly seating Victor L Berger and fighting any attempt to remove him.)

But this... this is just jackassery, angry people who've just completely lost it after one too many provocations, dangerous to themselves and everyone else.

But thank your lucky stars there ISN'T some yahoo out there with a bullhorn shouting helpful advice, cause think about where THAT would go.
(Mind you, I'd do it - say if they were TEA Party wackjobs all wound up, I'd do it just to CAUSE that slaughter cause they fuckin deserve it.)

ETA: Kiki - I don't think it's whether they're violent or not, so much as by who's rules you play the game, cause when you play by the rules of the enemy, on their turf, on their terms, that is gonna happen - when you bring your own rulebook, well... anything can happen, especially if you are both clever and willing to showboat, sensationalize and play the ever living hell out of it - you don't think I do the overlord thing just cause I get a kick out of it, do you ?
I mean, I do.. hehehe, too much, probably, but the flash and the flimflam baits attention, and it's attention you WANT - if the also-ignored G20 protestors in PA woulda followed my advice, they would have had this huge protest - IN PITTSBURG, via last minute bus trip, leaving all these cops in Philly standing around going WTF and man what a media coup that woulda been, right ?
Ain't WHAT you do, it's HOW.

-Frem

I do not serve the Blind God.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, August 8, 2011 9:55 PM

KANEMAN

I love when the Brits act this way. How did we beat em? Oh yeah that huge ocean!!!!

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, August 8, 2011 10:01 PM

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-14450248

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, August 9, 2011 1:42 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:
Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
Geezer

Your historical view is stuck on 'quaint'.

I think not.

Nevertheless, name a social change in the U.S. that was caused exclusively or mostly by violence on the part of the people protesting for it.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

I'd say the founding of the United States itself qualifies.

'Course, technically it doesn't, because it wasn't actually in "the United States" when it happened, but it IS how our nation was born, in violent protest.

In fact, there's even a little-known political movement that's sprung up in the last couple years in this country that bears the name of a violent political protest which helped launch this country. They call themselves a "Tea Party" of some sort; you may have heard of them.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, August 9, 2011 3:12 AM

WULFENSTAR

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

During the L.A. Riots, Korean shop owners finally had enough and defended their property.

"Hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things, and no good thing ever dies"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, August 9, 2011 3:22 AM

Keep the Shiny side up

Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
Geezer

Biggest march you never heard of - they politely marched, cleaned up the trash and went home. Oh, and got nowhere.

2004 March for Women's Lives

It does take a while, sometimes. Do you think looting the Smithsonian and blowing up the Washington Monument would have accomplished more?

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, August 9, 2011 3:27 AM

Keep the Shiny side up

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
I'd say the founding of the United States itself qualifies.

I'd consider that more of a political than a social change, but possibly. The other contender might be Emancipation during and after the Civil War, but that was largely due to political expediency rather than social pressure.

ETA: At least you've gotten closer than Kiki to an answer.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, August 9, 2011 3:33 AM

The abolition of slavery in the U.S. was also quite a violent social change...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, August 9, 2011 5:46 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

While I know there were political and other reasons, I believe that the massive protests of the Vietnam War were contributory to our getting out. The ones I took part in were all peaceful, as I believe the majority of them were.

Did the LA riots actually cause any social change, or improve things? I dunno, it's not something I've ever read anyone following up on, so I'm curious.

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, August 9, 2011 5:57 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
I'd say the founding of the United States itself qualifies.

I'd consider that more of a political than a social change, but possibly. The other contender might be Emancipation during and after the Civil War, but that was largely due to political expediency rather than social pressure.

ETA: At least you've gotten closer than Kiki to an answer.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

I think we're generally on the same page here, Geezer. Violence HAS been used to foment change, but generally speaking, things tend to go better for those seeking that change when they AREN'T the violent ones, but rather the ones who are having the violence done to them.

The Vietnam protests really took on a new life once four college kids were murdered for peacefully protesting in Ohio, for instance; the onus was on the PRO-war folks to try to explain their actions after those events.

If you ever said "Support the Troops!", you are a socialist. You've taken money from me, by force and at gunpoint, and you've given it to people who are on a mission I don't support, and are murdering others in my name, and I am given no choice in the matter.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, August 9, 2011 12:00 PM

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14452097

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, August 9, 2011 1:24 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!

Beyond pointless and nothing more than an excuse to throw a violent temper tantrum.

" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, August 9, 2011 3:43 PM

PIRATENEWS

John Lee, conspiracy therapist at Hollywood award-winner History Channel-mocked SNL-spoofed PirateNew.org wooHOO!!!!!!

It's alleged in this riot, as in others, that police intentionally allow the carnage in a Victim Disarmament Zone, in order to "justify" a Police State.

Cops in police-issued combat boots are often dressed as "anarchists".

The police violence is then directed at legitimate protesters and innocent bystanders.

Problem -- Reaction -- Solution... the Hegelian Dialectic.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, August 9, 2011 4:44 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:

Beyond pointless and nothing more than an excuse to throw a violent temper tantrum.

Yes, but we weren't discussing your beloved Tea Party; we're talking about London now.

Try to keep up, dummy.

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, August 9, 2011 5:09 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:

Beyond pointless and nothing more than an excuse to throw a violent temper tantrum.

Yes, but we weren't discussing your beloved Tea Party; we're talking about London now.

Try to keep up, dummy.

Violence is the domain of the purple shirted SEIU goons and the ACORN thugs.

Funny how you insist in inverting reality, and think anyone will buy it.

" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, August 9, 2011 6:52 PM

Beir bua agus beannacht

I agree that sometimes violence brings about change, its a fact of life. But randomly burning buildings and rioting don't really do much of anything except ruin the property and livelihood of uninvolved parties. Even Frem thinks it s a bad idea to do things like this, no direction, no real purpose anymore. The protest started out with an aim, now its just humanity behaving badly and no one will really think its a good thing, apparently except for Former Parasite Kiki. Random burning of things does bear a resemblance to a temper tantrum more than it does to a movement for change.

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, August 9, 2011 7:09 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

"Biggest march you never heard of - they politely marched, cleaned up the trash and went home. Oh, and got nowhere.

2004 March for Women's Lives
The April 25, 2004, March for Women's Lives drew a record 1.15 million people to Washington, D.C., to protect and advance access to a full range of reproductive health care options, including abortion, birth control and emergency contraception."

"It does take a while, sometimes. Do you think looting the Smithsonian and blowing up the Washington Monument would have accomplished more?"

Yes. It certainly couldn't accomplish less.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, August 9, 2011 7:58 PM

Beir bua agus beannacht

looting and destroying antiquities is what uneducated hordes do. I hope that doesn't happen to the Smithsonian because there is so much cool stuff there.

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, August 9, 2011 8:02 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

No power was ever given up by the powerful to the powerless without the threat of significant loss.

I think though you will find that as in the LA riots, the English riots (they are across the country) will spare the great institutions. That whole Smithsonian thing - that was just Geezer's hyperbole to inflame people's emotions and keep them from thinking.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, August 9, 2011 8:55 PM