Bylem w Washingtonie

IP: 168.103.126.* 19.01.03, 17:48
Bylo wspaniale. Moja grupa skladala sie ze studentow i nauczycieli przewaznie
zydow hindusow, katolikow z okilic Prospect Parku na Brooklynie. Mroz nam nie
przeszkodzilpokazac Bushowi po ktorej stronie jset narod amerykanski. Na
drodze marszu widzielismy tylko 5 demonstrantow pro Bushowskich na tarasie
hotelu kolo Kapitolu. Rowniez grupka okolo 10 miala prowojenne transparenty
przy pomniku wietnamskim. Nas bylo okolo 30 000. Ich 15. Demonstracje byly w
calym USA od Kaliforni do Main. Amerykanskie media prawie wogole nie mialy
zadnych wiadomosci o tych demonstracjach Media swiatowe przyniosly ta
wiadomosc na pierwszuym miejscu. NOT IN OUR NAME. NIE W NASZYM IMIENIU.
Niektorzy czlonkowie naszego kosciola byli w Iraku i w soich plecakach
przywiezli tam podstawowa pomoc medyczna taka jak aspiryne i penicyline.
Zostali za to ukarani przez wladze karami po 10 000 dolarow. Z braku rej
pomocy zmarlo 500 tysiecy irakijskich dzieci. Jest to wojna nie przeciw
Saddamowi ale przeciw ludnosci Iraku, przeciw dzieciom Iraku. W Iraku zyja
Katolicy, ta pomoc odmawiana jest rowniez im. Nie brakuje tylko pieniedzy na
zbrojenie Sharona!!!!!!!!!!!
    • Gość: anias dzięki za relacje, "wyborcza" wzmiankowała tylko IP: *.dip.t-dialin.net 19.01.03, 17:55
      oględnie o jakiejś demonstracji antywojennej, ale wyraźnie ociskało ją w tym
      momencie w bucie, że musi cokolwiek napisać
    • Gość: Jarek Re: Bylem w Washingtonie IP: *.proxy.aol.com 19.01.03, 18:02
      Tez bylem!
      Bylo zimno, jak cholera, paskudnie, ale ludzi mnostwo.
      Ludzie ci sami, co zawsze: lewacy, naiwniacy religijni, pacyfisci , ktorzy nic
      nie rozumieja z historii, generalnie: pozyteczni idioci /pozyteczni dla
      despotow typu Saddam/ .
      Hasla tez te same, co zawsze, niektore zupelnie bez sensu " No blood for oil",
      tak jakby to o "oil" chodzilo.
      W sumie dosc milo i bez niespodzianek.
      • Gość: kanuk do Jarka prawaka IP: proxy / *.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com 19.01.03, 18:08
        Hi my name is George W. BushWack
        Today I slaughtered another 500 civilian Afghani's. I starved, poisoned
        and murdered another thousand Iraqi children by keeping the sanctions against
        them (remember how my Daddy bombed all their water and food supplies too?), and
        now I will finish them off with another devastating war at tax payer expense.
        Today I also had the CIA smuggle another 3 tons of opium and cocaine into our
        country while convincing the ignorant Americans to give me more of their money
        to fight the "War on Drugs". Today I kept Medical Marijuana away from more Aids
        and Cancer Patients (arrested some of them too) even though the American People
        voted in favor of legalizing it and overwhelmingly passed it. I also convinced
        100,000 more dumb sheep to give up their Rights so I can make them "feel" more
        secure. I wasted another $33 Million of their money on bombs and weapons to
        murder more poor, third world countries who couldn't possibly fight back. Me,
        my Daddy, and of course the secret government behind the scenes that really run
        the show get richer by the day. We have BILLIONS invested in oil, weapons and
        drugs. Oh and I did all this today with American Tax Payer Money:)
        Thank God they are so blind and stupid
        • Gość: Jarek Re: do Jarka prawaka IP: *.proxy.aol.com 19.01.03, 18:10
          Ta prymitywna propaganda moze dzialac tylko na prymitywow, ktorzy ja
          umieszczaja na Forum:)
          • Gość: kanuk Re: do Jarka prawaka cz.2 IP: proxy / *.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com 19.01.03, 20:23
            It is interesting to note that the contractor whose people were the first on
            the WTC collapse scene — to cart away the rubble that remains — is the same
            contractor who demolished and hauled away the shell of the bombed Oklahoma City
            Murrah building. The name of the contractor is Controlled Demolition!



            The Second World War by Janusz Piekalkiewicz (Excerpt)
            P21: On Monday, the 30th of January, 1933, [German] Reichspresident von
            Hindenburg names the "Unknown Corporal" of the First World War, Adolf Hitler,
            as German Chancellor. ... On Friday, Febrauary 3, Hitler addresses the German
            Military Command, explaining his plans to eradicate Boshevism, fight the Treaty
            of Versailles, and conquer additional territory for German expansion.

            The day following the Reichstagsbrand, [the fire which burned down the German
            Parliament building] of Monday, February 27, 1933, Hitler issues an emergency
            decree suspending all guaranteed Constitutional Rights.

            On this day, the 28th of February 1933, by issue of this emergency decree, the
            de-facto Constitution of the National Socialist regime comes into being:
            Freedom and Inviolability of Person, Domicile, Correspondence, also Feeedom of
            Expression, Right of Assembly and Right of Association, as also too Right of
            Ownership, are abrogated "until further notice" and a State of Emergency
            declared, which only ended in May of 1945 with the collapse of the Nazi
            regime. ...

            P23: On Monday, the 20th of March, 1933, by order of Reichsführer of the SS
            Heinrich Himmler, the Concentration Camp Dachau was created, the first of 22
            camps with 165 subsidiaries to be built during the Nazi era. In Spring of 1933,
            already alone in Prussia 25,000 people had been placed under "preventive
            detention". By summer, numerous large concentration camps such as Oranienburg,
            Esterwegen and Papenburg had been built.




            See any parallels, folks? — over 1,200 individuals to date in secret detention,
            somewhere in the United Sttes — THAT WE KNOW ABOUT — and several hundreds of
            people in dog-pounds in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, under conditions of sensory-
            deprivation torture in contravention of all civilised conventions of war and
            peace?

            So what has this got to do with the price of eggs?

            Well, to date, following in the steps of his apparent mentor, Good Old Adolf,
            Good Ole Boy George W. still has another step to take, and that is eradication
            of any possible opposition, be it of democratically elected, or of military
            provenance, because Good Ole Adolf did just that: He was afraid of opposition
            by Ernst Roehm and his three million Brown Shirts who helped him get his Nazi
            Party into power, so thought fit to eliminate its leadership under the
            accusation that they were homosexuals, and so he got them together at a place
            called Wiessee, and then went over with his thugs one night — his self-
            named "Night of the Long Knives" — and those he did not eliminate on the spot,
            he captured and shot later, estimated as somewhere between 200 and, by our old
            teacher, an escaped German Jew, perhaps up to 600 men, claiming that only he
            had the right to pass the death sentence on them, "for the good of the German
            people". And in the secret detention camps in the USA and Cuba, military
            tribunals can execute anyone detained there without normal process of law, by
            decree of Good Ole Dubya — sound similar at all to Good Old Adolf



            BUT what IF ... "In Retaliation" for some "Nuclear Attack" on the USA? —
            perhaps an attack that was "Proven" to be BOTH from Iraq AND from Iran, and
            likely with delivery sytems "Proven" to only possibly have come from North
            Korea — the pre-defined "Axis of Evil" by George W. Bush?

            A nuclear attack on the USA would raise public anger to the point where any
            nuking, even of all sixty or so countries already named by the US
            Administration which require the cleaning-out of their "terrorist" inhabitants,
            would be accepted without demur nor bad conscience by the US public —
            especially if such a heinous attack were to wipe out the US elected government
            itself and only one brave soul were left pushing the buttons of Hell way ahead
            of his natural time, Our Hero, Good Ole Dubya himself?

            In the case of a simple incommunicado-holding of Representatives, for the
            public, it would of course be nice to know that your favourite Representative
            is hiding safely in some luxury out-of-the-way place, wouldn't it? So maybe you
            tell them way in advance that you have just such a spot already in mind?

            That there would be any strategic value in the information of its exact
            geographical location being published, would also be a moot point, because NO
            country would/could likely target a nuclear missile directly there ... UNLESS
            there were another September 11 "attack" and an unfortunate direct-hit on that
            slumbrous facility, in which case the Shadow Government would be in full
            control now, wouldn't it? The public now knows where their Senators and
            Congresspersons went, and the "fact" that the "Axis of Evil" just "happened" to
            score a "direct hit" on that place would suit the Bush Administration down to
            the ground. But, worse than this, such a deed would be the further logical step
            in this game-ploy used so successfully by Adolf Hitler in eliminating any
            remaining opposition to him, in the Night of the Long Knives.

            To get both Houses to evacuate Washington DC and to flee to some retreat
            willingly, there would have to be adequate cause, perhaps a small nuke quite
            near DC, then their voluntary evacuation, callup of reserves, declaration of
            martial law, state of national emergency, roundup of certain individuals,
            patriotic Bush speech denouncing both Iraq and Iran and a quick "retaliatory"
            strike decimating both countries, and maybe even North Korea "For supplying the
            delivery systems"?

            That would kill many birds with one stone; also a fortuitous nuke on the
            Greenbrier or other facility would allow events to move at an unprecedented
            pace unimaginable just at this moment by anyone.

            The scenario would become past and accepted history within days.

            IF the Greenbrier becomes a CURRENT theme, then look for an "Attack" near DC
            soon
            • Gość: kanuk Re: do Jarka prawaka cz.2 IP: proxy / *.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com 19.01.03, 21:03
              czy to tez jest "prymitywna propaganda"??? 19.1.Paryż (PAP/Reuters) - Prezydent
              Francji Jacques Chirac ostrzegł w niedzielę, że jednostronny atak Stanów
              Zjednoczonych na Irak bez poparcia ONZ doprowadzi do izolacji Waszyngtonu w
              skali międzynarodowej

              "Jeśli USA zdecydują się samotnie na interwencję, będziemy musieli stwierdzić,
              że wydarzyło się to poza społecznością międzynarodową" - oświadczył Chirac w
              wywiadzie dla konserwatywnego "Le Figaro", który ukaże się w poniedziałkowym
              numerze dziennika

              Atak na Irak - sprecyzował raz jeszcze swe stanowisko szef państwa
              francuskiego - nie będzie mógł być legalny, dopóki nie zapadnie w tej sprawie
              decyzja Rady Bezpieczeństwa ONZ, a może to nastąpić wyłącznie na podstawie
              sprawozdania inspektorów rozbrojeniowych, pracujących obecnie w Iraku

              Prezydent Francji podkreślił, że pragnie widzieć Irak jako kraj bez
              jakiejkolwiek broni masowego rażenia i wezwał prezydenta Saddama Husajna do
              współpracy z inspektorami rozbrojeniowymi ONZ. (PAP) ik/ mc/ ls/
              • Gość: Jarek Re: do Jarka prawaka cz.2 IP: *.proxy.aol.com 19.01.03, 21:12
                Gość portalu: kanuk napisał(a):

                > czy to tez jest "prymitywna propaganda"???
                (...)
                >
                > Prezydent Francji podkreślił, że pragnie widzieć Irak jako kraj bez
                > jakiejkolwiek broni masowego rażenia i wezwał prezydenta Saddama Husajna do
                > współpracy z inspektorami rozbrojeniowymi ONZ. (PAP) ik/ mc/ ls/


                Nie! to absolutnie nie jest prymitywna propaganda.

                To jest cenny dowod na naiwnosc i glupote Zachodniej Europy i potwierdzenie,
                ze juz tylko USA ma dosc dobrej woli i poczucia rzeczywistosci, aby
                przeciwstawiac sie despotom, jak Saddam.

                Prezydent Francji, w stylu politykow francuskich z czasow Hitlera, jest tak
                beznadziejnie naiwny, ze "wzywa" Saddama do "wspolpracy"!
                Akurat Saddam az pali sie do wspolpracy z inspektorami!:)
              • Gość: - Re: HUSSEIN I BOMBARDOWANIE IP: 168.103.126.* 19.01.03, 21:13
                NIKT NIE MA ZE HUSSEIN JEST TYRANEM, BOMBARDOWANIE US/UK ma na celu nie
                usuniecie Husseina od wladzy ( rumsfeld i towarzystwo zaopatrywali Huseeina w
                gazy trujace i bron) ale eksterminacje ludnosci Iraku, zniszczenie
                infrastruktury potrzebnej do zycia, wody, urzadzen sanitarnych, zniszczcenie
                szpitali, szkol, srodkow medycznych, zywnosci. Jest polityka eksterminacji.
        • portlandia1 Re: do Jarka prawaka 21.01.03, 03:25
          Gość portalu: kanuk napisał(a):

          >BRAVO, I love this, and I will send this message to all my friends:))

          Hi my name is George W. BushWack
          > Today I slaughtered another 500 civilian Afghani's. I starved, poisoned
          > and murdered another thousand Iraqi children by keeping the sanctions against
          > them (remember how my Daddy bombed all their water and food supplies too?),
          and
          >
          > now I will finish them off with another devastating war at tax payer expense.
          > Today I also had the CIA smuggle another 3 tons of opium and cocaine into our
          > country while convincing the ignorant Americans to give me more of their
          money
          > to fight the "War on Drugs". Today I kept Medical Marijuana away from more
          Aids
          >
          > and Cancer Patients (arrested some of them too) even though the American
          People
          >
          > voted in favor of legalizing it and overwhelmingly passed it. I also
          convinced
          > 100,000 more dumb sheep to give up their Rights so I can make them "feel"
          more
          > secure. I wasted another $33 Million of their money on bombs and weapons to
          > murder more poor, third world countries who couldn't possibly fight back. Me,
          > my Daddy, and of course the secret government behind the scenes that really
          run
          >
          > the show get richer by the day. We have BILLIONS invested in oil, weapons and
          > drugs. Oh and I did all this today with American Tax Payer Money:)
          > Thank God they are so blind and stupid
      • portlandia1 Re: Bylem w Washingtonie 21.01.03, 03:22
        a ty tak duzo rozumiesz z histori?? byles na wojnie?? nie sadze to zamknij sie
        bo nie wiesz co to wojna palancie prawicowy.
    • kochanka Pamietajcie ze Daniel to parszywy klamca! 19.01.03, 18:33
      Pamietajcie kto to pisze ze tam bylo 30.000:-) Chyba dodales jedno zero prawda
      klamczuchu?
      Daniel to ten sam idiota ktory jeszcze prawdy nigdy na rym forum nie napisal.
      Prosze przeczytac idioctwa tego naszego blazna Danielka:

      Wypociny Pan Daniela:

      Kłamstwo# 1
      wszystkie wiadomosci sa z NYTimesa i potwierdzone doswiadczeniem.
      Porownywanie z Nazizmem nie ma sensu, pamietajmy ze zolnierze polscy po II
      wojnie swiatowej emigrowali do USA, niektorzy umieszczani byli na farmach w
      Texasie, ci co chcieli uciec z farm byli strzelani.


      www.gazeta.pl/alfa/home.jsp?dzial=0511&forum=SWIAT&wid=690923&aid=715778




      Kłamstwo# 2

      Rodzice w szkolach prywatnych musza placic kazdego centa za swoje dziecko, ale
      w zydowskich yeshiwa dzieci sa dowozone na koszt stanu do szkoly.

      Kłamstwo # 3
      Ksiadz nie moze byc sedzia, Rabin - o.k.,

      Kłamstwo#4
      Choinki i kazde wyobrazenia Bozego Narodzenia sa zabronione w urzedach
      panstwowych, ale jest Menora swieci sie wszedzie.

      Kłamstwo# 5
      kara smierci, ilosc wiezniow w USA jest wieksza niz w komunistycznej Rosji.

      Kłamstwo # 6
      Obozy koncentracyjne na Florydzie dla emigrantow z Haiti, Brighton Beach dla
      emigrantow z Rosji ze stypendiami dla dzieci, opieka spoleczna i socjalna itd.

      Powyższe cytaty pochodzą tylko z jednego postu:


      www.gazeta.pl/alfa/home.jsp?dzial=0511&forum=SWIAT&wid=690923&aid=712124



      7. Oskarzenie o pedofilie - napewno wielokrotnie mniej zdarza sie wsrod ksiezy
      niz w szkolach publicznych, albo innych prywatnych,

      Powiedz nam Daniel gdzie zdobyles takie informacje????


      www.gazeta.pl/alfa/home.jsp?zial=0511&forum=SWIAT&wid=1774366&aid=1775643


      Dodatkowe wypociny:

      Daniel napisal:
      Nic nowego, Wiadomo od wielu lat ze USA ma olbrzymi deficyt, i ktos kiedys musi
      splacic te dlugi. Wlasnie dlatego bankierzy moga szntazowac rzad i wymagac od
      Busha ataku np. na Irak albo Palestyne.


      Teraz banki szanatzuja rzad USA!!! Ty danielu masy niesamowita wyobraznie!!


      Daniel napisal:
      Greespan podobno drukuje juz tony nanknotow i inflacja jest planowana.



      Wyobrazcie sobie cos takiego. Ktos naprawde planuje inflacje!!! He.He>He!!!!





      www.gazeta.pl/alfa/home.jsp?dzial=0511&forum=SWIAT&wid=1838795&aid=1839114


      • Gość: - Re: Kto to jest kochanka IP: 168.103.126.* 19.01.03, 19:05
        Ona tylko reaguje wtedy kiedy prawda ja doprowadza do pasji. Ta demonstracja
        doprowadzila ja do pasji. Pewnie byla wsrod tych policjantow ktorzy
        fotografowali, filmowali i z kajdankami czekali rozkaz wodza. Uzbrojeni po
        zeby, na motocyklach, w samochodach, w helikopterach i na piechote obstawili
        kazdy inch demonstarcji. Czyz tak wyglada demokracja? Pamietam ze u szczytu
        zimnej wojny bylem w Washingtonie, nie widzialem zadnej policji, chodzilem
        niesprawdzany po calym budynku Kapitolu, Bylem u przyjaciol w Voice of America,
        po Bialym Domu spacerowalem niemal jak mily gosc, kolo budynku FBI mile
        dziewczynki tanczyly na ladzie. Dzis nic z tego, nawet w muzeum zagladaja do
        torby, a do muzeum holokaustu krzycza za to toba - idz prosto, nie ogladaj
        sie!.. Pomyslcie - kochanka pracuje dla tego systemu. A im dluzej pracuje to
        system ten przescignie najwieksze marzenia batiuszki Stalina. Kochanka ma
        dobrych kumpli z Moskwy ktorzy pewnie uzbrojeni w komputery moga stworzyc dla
        nas prawdziwe pieklo terroru.
        • kochanka Przestan bredzic! 19.01.03, 19:11
          Gość portalu: - napisał(a):

          > Ona tylko reaguje wtedy kiedy prawda ja doprowadza do pasji. Ta demonstracja
          > doprowadzila ja do pasji. Pewnie byla wsrod tych policjantow ktorzy
          > fotografowali, filmowali i z kajdankami czekali rozkaz wodza. Uzbrojeni po
          > zeby, na motocyklach, w samochodach, w helikopterach i na piechote obstawili
          > kazdy inch demonstarcji. Czyz tak wyglada demokracja? Pamietam ze u szczytu
          > zimnej wojny bylem w Washingtonie, nie widzialem zadnej policji, chodzilem
          > niesprawdzany po calym budynku Kapitolu, Bylem u przyjaciol w Voice of
          America,
          >
          > po Bialym Domu spacerowalem niemal jak mily gosc, kolo budynku FBI mile
          > dziewczynki tanczyly na ladzie. Dzis nic z tego, nawet w muzeum zagladaja do
          > torby, a do muzeum holokaustu krzycza za to toba - idz prosto, nie ogladaj
          > sie!.. Pomyslcie - kochanka pracuje dla tego systemu. A im dluzej pracuje to
          > system ten przescignie najwieksze marzenia batiuszki Stalina. Kochanka ma
          > dobrych kumpli z Moskwy ktorzy pewnie uzbrojeni w komputery moga stworzyc dla
          > nas prawdziwe pieklo terroru.


          Te twoje 30.000 to takie samo klamstwo jak te o twoim koledze ktory po WTC
          dostal tak wysokie odszkodowanbie ze kupuje sobie zamki i wyspy.
          Jestes rakiem zlosliwym naszego spoleczenstwa ktory zamiast krytykowc cos co
          jest istotne krytykuje rzeczy nieistniejace.

          ps
          A gdzie ta wyspa?
        • kochanka Przyklad kretynstwa Pana Daniela: 19.01.03, 19:23
          Re: wspomnienia
          Autor: Gość portalu: -
          Data: 31-05-2002 16:38 adres: 168.103.126.*


          --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Moj przyjaciel pracowal na 82 pietrze polnocnej wiezy, uratowal sie. Jego
          kolega niewidomy z psem rowniez zdazyli uciec.
          Moj inny przyjaciel pracujacy w Goldman Sachs zarobil po 9/11 ogromne
          pieniadze, poprostu nie wie co z nimi robic, kupuje palace i wyspy, tymczasem
          mysmy stracili na mutual founds i naszych akcjach.





          Po WTC jego wspomnieniem bylo to ze on na akcjach stracil.
          Na dodatek bredzi cos o zarabianiu strasznych pieniedzy po WTC. Nawet ten ktos
          wyspy kupuje! Co za IDIOTA!
    • kochanka Bylem w Washingtonie-I to napewno tez klamstwo 19.01.03, 19:31
      Na pewno nawet tam nie byles!
      • Gość: felusiak Czas na zabicie tego watku IP: *.nyc.rr.com 19.01.03, 21:42
        Niesamowicie idiotyczne bazgroly daniela i jemu podobnych debili.
        Czas zakonczyc ten watek.
        • Gość: - Re: IP: 168.103.126.* 19.01.03, 23:33
          Ilosc ludzi na Mall przed Kapitolem wygladala na mniej, ale w czasie marszu do
          Navy Yard wlaczyli sie wszyscy demonstranci, czyli pol miliona. Nic dziwnego ze
          nawet Bialy Dom uznal ze demonstarnci maja prawo do demonstracji. Radio
          Kanadyjskie informowalo ze ludnosc Kanady i USA jest zaniepokojona
          dzialalnoscia "podzegajacego do wojny" rzadu amerykanskiego. A oto co podaje
          amerykanski ANSWER. Czytajcie i razem z cala Europa zagrodzcie droge do wojny.
          Czas pozbyc sie faszystow i podzegaczy wojennych! Polska wyzwolila sie od
          komunizmu nie na drodze wojennych dzialan a przy pomocy ewolucji ! Irakijczyc
          tez maja prawo do zycia i rozwoju! Bez tego prawa swiat czeka tylko 3 wojna!


          500,000 Anti-War Protesters Demonstrate in Washington
          200,00 March in San Francisco
          Hundreds of Thousands More Demonstrate Around the World
          To Oppose U.S. War With Iraq

          Half a million people marched through the streets of
          Washington Saturday and 200,000 demonstrated in San
          Francisco in the largest U.S. demonstrations yet against
          war with Iraq.

          Sponsored by the International A.N.S.W.E.R. (Act Now to
          Stop War & End Racism) Coalition, the protests were
          endorsed by thousands of organizations. Similar
          demonstrations were held in at least 30 other countries.

          "Today's demonstrations shattered the myth of consensus
          for war," said Mara Verheyden-Hilliard of the Partnership
          for Civil Justice, one of the groups in A.N.S.W.E.R.
          "Throughout the whole world, demonstrations today showed
          the kind of people's power it's going to take to stop the
          war in its tracks."

          January 18 was a day of global protest based in the U.S.,
          with coordinated demonstrations held in more than 30
          countries
    • Gość: pawel ile ich bylo? IP: *.ae.krakow.pl 20.01.03, 00:27
      Mozliwe ze 30 tys. ale nigdzie nie przeczytalem ile. W La Vanguardia wyczytalem
      ze dziesiatki tysiecy z calego kraju:
      www.lavanguardia.es/web/20030119/134051797.html
      Decenas de miles de activistas llegados de todo el país participaron en la
      marcha en la capital federal, que se inició delante del Capitolio y concluyó en
      la Navy Yard, un complejo militar en un barrio humilde del sudeste de la
      capital estadounidense.

      Malo. A szkoda.
      • Gość: INDEPENDENT RE;NIELEGALNA I NIEMORALNA WOJNA IP: 168.103.126.* 20.01.03, 02:07

        Global protest delivers a resounding 'No'
        Anti-war protests: Hundreds of thousands of people around the world stage mass
        demonstrations against conflict with Iraq
        By Jo Dillon, James Morrison and Andrew Buncombe
        19 January 2003


        They united in protest. A builder in Bradford, a Glasgow nurse, a London office
        worker and his opposite number in Tokyo, a Vietnam veteran in Washington DC and
        a Russian bank clerk, a Pakistani schoolboy, a Cairo shopworker, a Parisian
        housewife and a doctor in Damascus. They all came together in a single act of
        defiance. Hundreds of thousands of people across the world joined in a common
        aim, across cultural divides and language barriers to say "No".

        As around 100,000 troops from Britain and America made their way to the Gulf,
        their numbers were dwarfed by the ranks of ordinary men and women who took to
        the streets in cities around the world to condemn war on Iraq. And the
        demonstrators' clear message to their leaders was echoed in a swelling chorus
        of generals, defence experts, actors, musicians, writers and artists speaking
        out against threatened military action.

        Their call may not be heeded but it was loud enough to be heard.

        In Washington, American citizens staged the biggest peace demonstration since
        the days of the Vietnam war. "I'm a Vietnam veteran," said David Mastrianni,
        55, a software engineer from Southington, Connecticut, who had travelled down
        with his wife, Nancy, determined to protect against "another generation being
        sent off to war".

        Mr Mastrianni was an easy-going man, not especially haunted by the time he
        spent between 1968 and 1969 as a drafted army engineer at Long Binh, outside of
        what was then Saigon. He was more haunted, he said, by the idea of allowing a
        war to take place without making his protest. It was the first time that either
        he or his wife had been to a peace demonstration. "Maybe we have learnt our
        lessons, and we have learnt not to believe everything our government tells us,"
        said Mrs Mastrianni.

        There were many protesters like the Mastriannis: peace-demo virgins who for
        various reasons felt this was the time to join in, to listen to more than 50
        speakers rally against military action and then to join the tens of thousands
        on a march to the US Navy Yard in Washington and demand in vain to inspect
        America's own weapons of mass destruction.

        Never had their message been received by so many people "in the mainstream",
        said organisers. "You are talking to the broader base now," said Susan Riley, a
        nurse from Minneapolis.

        Outside the Permanent Joint Headquarters of the British Armed Forces in
        Northwood, north-west London, hundreds gathered to hear the veteran Labour
        leftwinger Tony Benn warn of "massive" opposition across Britain to the
        prospect of war: 2,000 were in Shannon, Ireland, 2,500 in Liverpool, 1,500 in
        Cardiff, 2,000 in Bradford, 250 in Glasgow ...

        The protesters were in good company. Sir Michael Quinlan, former permanent
        secretary at the Ministry of Defence, this weekend told The Independent on
        Sunday that war was "disproportionate". Major-General Julian Thompson, a senior
        Falklands veteran, admitted he was "not persuaded of the case for war at the
        moment". "I also don't think that Saddam Hussein is necessarily the right
        target," he added. And defence analyst Paul Beaver urged a "second mandate"
        from the UN before war was contemplated.

        There was outright opposition too from the actress Juliet Stevenson, who
        insisted: "This is not our war, and not one we should have got involved in."
        The screenwriter Alan Bleasdale said he was "horrified" at the prospect of war,
        and Corin Redgrave, the actor, called for civil disobedience and industrial
        action. Body Shop founder Anita Roddick said: "Shame on Bush and Blair for
        threatening their illegal and immoral war."

        Some in the arts world are determined to take further action. The actress Julie
        Christie is urging performers to support a public declaration against war.
        Her "No War Pledge", already signed by 40 prominent names and organisations,
        including the actress Emma Thompson, the comedian Victoria Wood and the film-
        maker Mike Leigh, is to be posted in a national newspaper to coincide with the
        27 January deadline for the presentation of the UN weapons inspectors' report.

        The pledge describes war on Iraq as "immoral and contrary to international
        law", urges the British government to withhold support for it and calls on "all
        who support peace and respect international law to take a similar stand".

        Voices against war: actors writers, warriors, citizens
        Paul Beaver, defence analyst

        I would like to see a second mandate from the United Nations. I don't want
        Britain to squander its position within the Arab and Muslim world by unilateral
        action with the US. Another reason against it is that this is a campaign which,
        if the country is going to invest in it, will cost us around £1bn.

        Douglas Hurd, former foreign secretary

        The overthrow of an Arab regime, however odious, by an Anglo-American military
        force would seem different [from the 1991 war]. The greatest danger might arise
        in the aftermath of a war in a region that would see itself under the
        domination of the US, the protector of Israel.

        Sir Michael Quinlan, former permanent secretary at the Ministry of Defence

        If we are talking about war, I think it is disproportionate. It is an enormous
        thing to start a war with all the direct effects and repercussions in the
        region. I don't think Saddam, though very nasty internally, is danger enough to
        be worth a war.

        Alan Davies, actor

        Inspectors found a dozen empty warheads under a pile of earth, but it's not
        enough to convince me to send anyone to risk their life. I have my doubts about
        war because of the issue of oil. The focus on Iraq has less to do with the war
        against terrorism than a long-standing grudge held by the Republican Party.

        David Hare, playwright

        An unsanctioned invasion of Iraq has no legitimacy. Its arbitrariness is an
        encouragement to terrorists. I wish an end to dictatorship in Pakistan, Saudi
        Arabia, Burma, China, as well as in Iraq. Most of all I wish for a US
        government which has the guts to imagine a policy for peace in the Middle East.

        Tony Benn, former MP

        You cannot take a nation to war unless it is united. There is massive
        opposition in Britain: 58 per cent. Bush and Blair are planning to tear up the
        UN Charter to make a war which would be a regressive war, to kill people, which
        would be a war crime, and to do it in a way which would endanger world peace.

        Juliet Stevenson, actor

        This is not our war, and not one we should have got involved in. It's a
        complete mystery to me why we've allowed ourselves to get drawn in. I don't
        have any sense of what it's really about. It's certainly not about what they
        say it is. We've been hoodwinked and misled.

        General Sir Michael Rose

        As a commander, I would not want to lead my troops into battle unless I was
        totally convinced of its just cause and that all necessary resources had been
        made available. So far, this does not seem to be the case. And how will a war
        against Iraq impact on the global war against terrorism?

        Salman Rushdie, writer

        There is a strong case for a "regime change" in Iraq. The complicating factor
        is the US's approach which looks like bullying because, well, it is bullying.
        If the US reserves the right to attack any country it doesn't like the look of,
        then those who don't like the look of the US might return the compliment.

        Field Marshal Lord Bramall, former chief of the Defence Staff

        This is a potentially very dangerous situation in which this country might be
        swept into a messy and long-lasting Middle East war. All I ask is that this
        thing is looked at carefully. We are supposed to be taking a lead on the moral
        • kochanka Znowu ten kretyn Daniel! 20.01.03, 02:17

          • Gość: felusiak Juz wystarczy tych idiotyzmow. IP: *.nyc.rr.com 20.01.03, 03:15
            • Gość: - Re: Do kogo kochanka wojo i felusiak pisza IP: 168.103.126.* 20.01.03, 15:27
              do swoich szefow, ktorzy tego nie czytaja i do samych siebie.
              • Gość: Tysprowda Re: Do kogo kochanka wojo i felusiak pisza IP: proxy / 193.188.174.* 20.01.03, 16:06
                Tak zarabiaja na chleb z maslem i szynka. Uwazaja, ze zadna praca nie hanbi bo
                sie juz zhanbili.
                • Gość: felusiak Re: Do kogo kochanka wojo i felusiak pisza IP: *.nyc.rr.com 20.01.03, 17:10
                  Odseparowac mnie natychmiast od wojo i kochanki.
                  Ja sie od nich odcinam, odcinam sie od wszystkich i na dodatek nie mam szefa.
                  Moje poglady wyrazane tu nie sa mi dyktowane ani tez nie staram sie nikomu
                  przypodobac.
    • galaxy2099 I co z tego 20.01.03, 17:17
      I czym ty sie czlowieku chcesz pochwalic ? Wspieraniem rezimow ?
      I nie mow w imieniu narodu, nie badz przynajmniej tak bezczelny.
      Historia zna kilku takich ktorym wydawalo sie, ze cierpia za miliony.



      Gość portalu: Daniel napisał(a):

      > Bylo wspaniale. Moja grupa skladala sie ze studentow i nauczycieli przewaznie
      > zydow hindusow, katolikow z okilic Prospect Parku na Brooklynie. Mroz nam nie
      > przeszkodzilpokazac Bushowi po ktorej stronie jset narod amerykanski. Na
      > drodze marszu widzielismy tylko 5 demonstrantow pro Bushowskich na tarasie
      > hotelu kolo Kapitolu. Rowniez grupka okolo 10 miala prowojenne transparenty
      > przy pomniku wietnamskim. Nas bylo okolo 30 000. Ich 15. Demonstracje byly w
      > calym USA od Kaliforni do Main. Amerykanskie media prawie wogole nie mialy
      > zadnych wiadomosci o tych demonstracjach Media swiatowe przyniosly ta
      > wiadomosc na pierwszuym miejscu. NOT IN OUR NAME. NIE W NASZYM IMIENIU.
      > Niektorzy czlonkowie naszego kosciola byli w Iraku i w soich plecakach
      > przywiezli tam podstawowa pomoc medyczna taka jak aspiryne i penicyline.
      > Zostali za to ukarani przez wladze karami po 10 000 dolarow. Z braku rej
      > pomocy zmarlo 500 tysiecy irakijskich dzieci. Jest to wojna nie przeciw
      > Saddamowi ale przeciw ludnosci Iraku, przeciw dzieciom Iraku. W Iraku zyja
      > Katolicy, ta pomoc odmawiana jest rowniez im. Nie brakuje tylko pieniedzy na
      > zbrojenie Sharona!!!!!!!!!!!
      • Gość: independent Re: Frank Gehry przeciwny wojnie - IP: 168.103.126.* 20.01.03, 17:45
        Home > News > World > Politics



        Across the site

        Related links

        Iraq agrees greater access for UN inspectors

        Rumsfeld backs plan to exile Saddam

        Iraq admits possessing four more chemical warheads

        Growing unease brings protests across the world

        Riot at funeral of Israeli settler

        Leading article: We cannot go to war just because Saddam is a liar

        Bruce Anderson: Peace will come to the Middle East only if Mr Bush decides to
        impose a solution

        Top Stories

        Armed police raid London mosque

        Home owners face 'tax on transport links'

        Iraq agrees greater access for UN inspectors

        Blair rules out euro referendum in 2003

        Canberra in panic as four die in bushfires

        US hardliners 'discussed attacking North Korea'

        Also from this section

        Iraq agrees greater access for UN inspectors

        Rumsfeld backs plan to exile Saddam

        Iraq admits possessing four more chemical warheads

        A world against the war

        'Nuclear data' found in scientist's home

        Growing unease brings protests across the world
        By Andrew Grice and Andrew Gumbel
        20 January 2003


        Protests against war in Iraq took place in cities across the world over the
        weekend amid growing public unease at plans by Washington and London to topple
        Saddam Hussein's regime.

        Organisers in America were ecstatic after some of the largest rallies there in
        memory. As many as 500,000 people descended on the Mall in Washington on
        Saturday, followed by a 1,000-strong band yesterday, with about 16 arrest-ed
        for breaching barricades.

        More than 100,000 thronged the streets of San Francisco in an anti-war rally.

        Tens of thousands of protesters marched in cities across Europe and the Middle
        East yesterday. In Spain, several thousand descended on a former US military
        base on the outskirts of Madrid. About 5,000 people marched through Brussels,
        and in Turkey 2,000 protesters gathered in Ankara.

        In the West Bank, thousands marched in Jenin and Tulkarm, some shouting, "We
        sacrifice our soul and blood for Saddam."

        In Britain around 50 anti-war protesters were arrested yesterday at a sit-down
        demonstration outside the Permanent Joint Headquarters of the British Armed
        Forces in Northwood, north-west London. Thousands also marched in London,
        Cardiff, Birmingham and Bradford.

        Tony Blair faces a Labour rebellion on 28 January when the party's national
        executive committee discusses a motion calling on the Government to "seek a
        diplomatic and political solution to the situation in Iraq, and to desist
        from ... pre-emptive action".

        Doug Henderson, a former foreign office and defence minister, urged Mr Blair to
        listen to the "very, very grave doubts" of the public. Charles Kennedy, the
        Liberal Democrat leader, said the work of the weapons inspectors was being
        hampered by "noises off" from the British and US governments.

        Peter Hain, the Welsh Secretary, predicted "a lot more" would emerge about
        Iraq's weapons. He told GMTV's Sunday programme he wanted a second UN
        resolution rather than "pre-emptive action".

        • In a letter to The Independent, 17 architects, including Lord Rogers of
        Riverside, Sir Terry Farrell and Frank Gehry, said war would exacerbate
        terrorism and be "immoral".
        20 January 2003 11:32

        Search this site:


        Printable Story





        • Gość: pravda Re: wielka antywojenna demonstarcja w San Fracisco IP: 168.103.126.* 20.01.03, 18:30
          A grand anti-military demonstration is expected to take place in San Francisco

          It is generally believed that the vast majority of Americans support the army
          variant for the solution of the Iraqi problem. Judging by the results of
          opinion polls, the number of those people, who support the idea of the war in
          Iraq, fluctuates within 55-70%. However, news agencies report about anti-
          military actions that take place in the United States sometimes. As a rule,
          those actions are not frequent, although they cause a commotion, attracting the
          attention of the press. The American press likes to draw an analogy with the
          period of the war in Vietnam. By the way, the last demonstration in Los Angeles
          ended up with the arrest of 17 protesters. Anti-military demonstrations in the
          beginning of the 1970s of the 20th century exerted considerable influence on
          Washington's solution to stop the war in Vietnam. However, there is no reason
          to believe that the incumbent American administration will listen to what the
          protesters have to say.

          A demonstration of protest against the war in Iraq is to take place in San
          Francisco on January 18th. American newspapers publish articles about it on
          their front pages. As it is expected, it will be the most massive action of
          protest over the recent period of time. As organizers say, up to 80 thousand
          people might take part in the demonstration. About 20 thousand people took part
          in the anti-military protest action in New York last October. Anyway, the
          number of protesters is not the most important thing. The most important thing
          is the fact that the event was organized by trade unions. The American
          government did not really pay much attention to actions of protests before, for
          they were presumably organized by pacifist and student societies.

          Trade unions have a simple explanation for their action. It is generally
          believed that the military operation in Iraq will cost not less than $200
          billion. This might result in the reduction of unemployment and other social
          allowances. Every trade union member or his or her family have either
          relatives, or someone they know in the army. Their children will have to go to
          Iraq.

          A lot of observers both in America and abroad have strong doubts about the
          efficiency of the coming demonstration. The protesters are democrats-oriented
          people, which gives the incumbent American administration a reason to ignore
          anti-military actions. There is always an opportunity to say that the
          opposition uses them for the sake of their own political goals. Then they will
          say that the nation has to be united against the background of the fight with
          the international terrorism and so on and so forth.

          On the whole, there can be one conclusion made: anti-military demonstrations
          are not going to succeed in the nearest future. The White House is absolutely
          not interested in the opinion of those, who do not want another war in Iraq to
          happen. It deems that the only way for protesters to attract attention is to
          organize their actions as often as possible. The more people they gather, the
          more reports the press will make. At the end of the day, that tactics was a
          successful one during the time of the Vietnamese war. Hopefully, it will work
          nowadays, although George W. Bush has a very strong desire
          • Gość: VoteNoWar Re: Komentarze prasy USA po 18.1.03 IP: 168.103.126.* 21.01.03, 03:11


            An Open Letter to the VoteNoWar Membership and to the Anti-War Movement (please
            re-forward and post):

            The political impact of Saturday’s massive anti-war demonstrations organized by
            International A.N.S.W.E.R. can already be seen. Today’s New York Times
            editorial, “A Stirring in the Nation,” reflects that the anti-war movement
            represents millions of people in the United States and cannot be discounted.
            Together we have shattered the myth conjured by politicians, by the media which
            have dutifully echoed Bush’s calls for war, and by those who profit from war
            that there is a consensus of support in the United States for Bush’s war of
            aggression against Iraq.

            Now, even the New York Times, which has a declared policy of support for the
            Bush Administration’s goals in Iraq, cannot deny the breadth and strength of
            the movement that you and so many thousands have built.

            Today’s NYT editorial signifies that a growing section of the political
            establishment fears the dynamic rise of the U.S. anti-war movement, and is
            deeply concerned that Bush's rush towards war will have a destabilizing impact
            on the political system as a whole.

            The editorial also reflects what we have said all along: it is the opposition
            of the people of the United States and the world that constitutes the single
            biggest obstacle to the Bush Administration as it rushes towards war. (See
            below for the NYT editorial and additional coverage of the demonstrations from
            the Washington Post, LA Times and SF Chronicle.)

            Reuters, Molly Riley

            The rising tide of the anti-war movement cannot be ignored. Half a million
            people braved the coldest weather of the year in a march in Washington, D.C.
            Over 200,000 demonstrated at the A.N.S.W.E.R. demonstration in San Francisco,
            and large crowds gathered in local January 18 actions, including more than
            20,000 in Portland, 5,000 in Tucson, 4,000 in Albuquerque, and in many other
            cities. Hundreds of thousands more joined demonstrations in over 30 countries.

            Now is the time for the movement to intensify activity at the local and
            regional level as part of worldwide anti-war movement. On January 18, the
            A.N.S.W.E.R. Coalition called for a nationally coordinated day of local
            protests at Federal buildings on Wednesday, January 29, the day following
            Bush's State of the Union address, which is expected to be a 'war speech.'

            On January 18, the A.N.S.W.E.R. Coalition called for the U.S. movement to
            support the call issued from the European movement for mass anti-war
            demonstrations on February 15. There will be demonstrations in thousands of
            cities across the country and around the world on February 15. A.N.S.W.E.R.
            joins with UFPJ and hundreds of other organizations who will be mobilizing for
            the NYC action. The February 15 protest will be part of the Week of Anti-War
            Resistance from February 13 to
            February 21.

            We need your help to keep this movement strong as we build on the
            accomplishments of January 18. The VoteNoWar Campaign relies on the generous
            donations of individuals like you. At this critical moment, we ask that you
            contribute what you can to keep the momentum that we have all build together.
            We are making a difference. You can make an online tax deductible contribution
            by credit card, or find out where to send a tax deductible donation by check,
            by clicking here.

            Look out in your e-mail box, in the coming days, for even more detail on next
            steps and upcoming events from VoteNoWar.

            In solidarity,

            All of us at VoteNoWar.org

            This open letter was originally dispatched via e-mail to our VoteNoWar members.
            If it was forwarded to you, and you would like to receive communications from
            us about upcoming events and educational campaigns, then please Click here to
            subscribe.. If you no longer wish to be on our e-mail, list then simply Click
            here to unsubscribe..


            --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

            [The New York Times editorial, and excerpts from articles appearing in the
            Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times and the San Francisco Chronicle follow
            below]

            A Stirring in the Nation
            New York Times Editorial Page
            January 20, 2003
            A largely missing ingredient in the nascent debate about invading Iraq showed
            up on the streets of major cities over the weekend as crowds of peaceable
            protesters marched in a demand to be heard. They represented what appears to be
            a large segment of the American public that remains unconvinced that the Iraqi
            threat warrants the use of military force at this juncture.

            Denouncing the war plan as an administration idée fixe that will undermine
            America's standing in the world, stir unrest in the Mideast and damage the
            American economy, the protesters in Washington massed on Saturday for what
            police described as the largest antiwar rally at the Capitol since the Vietnam
            era. It was impressive for the obvious mainstream roots of the marchers — from
            young college students to grayheads with vivid protest memories of the 60's.
            They gathered from near and far by the tens of thousands, galvanized by the
            possibility that President Bush will soon order American forces to attack Iraq
            even without the approval of the United Nations Security Council.

            Mr. Bush and his war cabinet would be wise to see the demonstrators as a clear
            sign that noticeable numbers of Americans no longer feel obliged to salute the
            administration's plans because of the shock of Sept. 11 and that many harbor
            serious doubts about his march toward war. The protesters are raising some
            nuanced questions in the name of patriotism about the premises, cost and
            aftermath of the war the president is contemplating. Millions of Americans who
            did not march share the concerns and have yet to hear Mr. Bush make a
            persuasive case that combat operations are the only way to respond to Saddam
            Hussein. Mr. Bush and his war cabinet would be wise to see the demonstrators as
            a clear sign that noticeable numbers of Americans no longer feel obliged to
            salute the administration's plans because of the shock of Sept. 11 and that
            many harbor serious doubts about his march toward war.

            Other protests will be emphasizing civil disobedience in the name of Martin
            Luther King Jr. But any graphic moments to come of confrontation and arrest
            should be seen in the far broader context of the Capitol scene: peaceable
            throngs of mainstream Americans came forward demanding more of a dialogue from
            political leaders. Mr. Bush and his aides, to their credit, welcomed the
            demonstrations as a healthy manifestation of American democracy at work. We
            hope that spirit will endure in the weeks ahead if differences deepen and a
            noisier antiwar movement develops. These protests are the tip of a far broader
            sense of concern and lack of confidence in the path to war that seems to lie
            ahead.


            --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

            Thousands Oppose a Rush to War
            Chill Doesn't Cool Fury Over U.S. Stand on Iraq
            By Manny Fernandez and Justin Blum
            Washington Post Staff Writers
            Sunday, January 19, 2003; Page A01
            Click here to view the full Washington Post article.

            Tens of thousands of antiwar demonstrators converged on Washington yesterday,
            making a thunderous presence
            in the bitter cold and assembling in the shadow of the Capitol dome to oppose a
            U.S. military strike against
            Iraq.

            Throughout a morning rally on the Mall and an afternoon march to the Washington
            Navy Yard in Southeast, activists criticized the Bush administration for
            rushing into a war that they claimed would kill thousands of Iraqi civilians,
            spell disaster for the national economy and set a dangerous and unjustified
            first-strike precedent for U.S. foreign policy.

            They delivered that message on a
            • kochanka To byl Dupek Daniel 21.01.03, 03:21

          • Gość: VoteNoWar Re: Komentarze prasy USA po 18.1.03 IP: 168.103.126.* 21.01.03, 03:12


            An Open Letter to the VoteNoWar Membership and to the Anti-War Movement (please
            re-forward and post):

            The political impact of Saturday’s massive anti-war demonstrations organized by
            International A.N.S.W.E.R. can already be seen. Today’s New York Times
            editorial, “A Stirring in the Nation,” reflects that the anti-war movement
            represents millions of people in the United States and cannot be discounted.
            Together we have shattered the myth conjured by politicians, by the media which
            have dutifully echoed Bush’s calls for war, and by those who profit from war
            that there is a consensus of support in the United States for Bush’s war of
            aggression against Iraq.

            Now, even the New York Times, which has a declared policy of support for the
            Bush Administration’s goals in Iraq, cannot deny the breadth and strength of
            the movement that you and so many thousands have built.

            Today’s NYT editorial signifies that a growing section of the political
            establishment fears the dynamic rise of the U.S. anti-war movement, and is
            deeply concerned that Bush's rush towards war will have a destabilizing impact
            on the political system as a whole.

            The editorial also reflects what we have said all along: it is the opposition
            of the people of the United States and the world that constitutes the single
            biggest obstacle to the Bush Administration as it rushes towards war. (See
            below for the NYT editorial and additional coverage of the demonstrations from
            the Washington Post, LA Times and SF Chronicle.)

            Reuters, Molly Riley

            The rising tide of the anti-war movement cannot be ignored. Half a million
            people braved the coldest weather of the year in a march in Washington, D.C.
            Over 200,000 demonstrated at the A.N.S.W.E.R. demonstration in San Francisco,
            and large crowds gathered in local January 18 actions, including more than
            20,000 in Portland, 5,000 in Tucson, 4,000 in Albuquerque, and in many other
            cities. Hundreds of thousands more joined demonstrations in over 30 countries.

            Now is the time for the movement to intensify activity at the local and
            regional level as part of worldwide anti-war movement. On January 18, the
            A.N.S.W.E.R. Coalition called for a nationally coordinated day of local
            protests at Federal buildings on Wednesday, January 29, the day following
            Bush's State of the Union address, which is expected to be a 'war speech.'

            On January 18, the A.N.S.W.E.R. Coalition called for the U.S. movement to
            support the call issued from the European movement for mass anti-war
            demonstrations on February 15. There will be demonstrations in thousands of
            cities across the country and around the world on February 15. A.N.S.W.E.R.
            joins with UFPJ and hundreds of other organizations who will be mobilizing for
            the NYC action. The February 15 protest will be part of the Week of Anti-War
            Resistance from February 13 to
            February 21.

            We need your help to keep this movement strong as we build on the
            accomplishments of January 18. The VoteNoWar Campaign relies on the generous
            donations of individuals like you. At this critical moment, we ask that you
            contribute what you can to keep the momentum that we have all build together.
            We are making a difference. You can make an online tax deductible contribution
            by credit card, or find out where to send a tax deductible donation by check,
            by clicking here.

            Look out in your e-mail box, in the coming days, for even more detail on next
            steps and upcoming events from VoteNoWar.

            In solidarity,

            All of us at VoteNoWar.org

            This open letter was originally dispatched via e-mail to our VoteNoWar members.
            If it was forwarded to you, and you would like to receive communications from
            us about upcoming events and educational campaigns, then please Click here to
            subscribe.. If you no longer wish to be on our e-mail, list then simply Click
            here to unsubscribe..


            --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

            [The New York Times editorial, and excerpts from articles appearing in the
            Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times and the San Francisco Chronicle follow
            below]

            A Stirring in the Nation
            New York Times Editorial Page
            January 20, 2003
            A largely missing ingredient in the nascent debate about invading Iraq showed
            up on the streets of major cities over the weekend as crowds of peaceable
            protesters marched in a demand to be heard. They represented what appears to be
            a large segment of the American public that remains unconvinced that the Iraqi
            threat warrants the use of military force at this juncture.

            Denouncing the war plan as an administration idée fixe that will undermine
            America's standing in the world, stir unrest in the Mideast and damage the
            American economy, the protesters in Washington massed on Saturday for what
            police described as the largest antiwar rally at the Capitol since the Vietnam
            era. It was impressive for the obvious mainstream roots of the marchers — from
            young college students to grayheads with vivid protest memories of the 60's.
            They gathered from near and far by the tens of thousands, galvanized by the
            possibility that President Bush will soon order American forces to attack Iraq
            even without the approval of the United Nations Security Council.

            Mr. Bush and his war cabinet would be wise to see the demonstrators as a clear
            sign that noticeable numbers of Americans no longer feel obliged to salute the
            administration's plans because of the shock of Sept. 11 and that many harbor
            serious doubts about his march toward war. The protesters are raising some
            nuanced questions in the name of patriotism about the premises, cost and
            aftermath of the war the president is contemplating. Millions of Americans who
            did not march share the concerns and have yet to hear Mr. Bush make a
            persuasive case that combat operations are the only way to respond to Saddam
            Hussein. Mr. Bush and his war cabinet would be wise to see the demonstrators as
            a clear sign that noticeable numbers of Americans no longer feel obliged to
            salute the administration's plans because of the shock of Sept. 11 and that
            many harbor serious doubts about his march toward war.

            Other protests will be emphasizing civil disobedience in the name of Martin
            Luther King Jr. But any graphic moments to come of confrontation and arrest
            should be seen in the far broader context of the Capitol scene: peaceable
            throngs of mainstream Americans came forward demanding more of a dialogue from
            political leaders. Mr. Bush and his aides, to their credit, welcomed the
            demonstrations as a healthy manifestation of American democracy at work. We
            hope that spirit will endure in the weeks ahead if differences deepen and a
            noisier antiwar movement develops. These protests are the tip of a far broader
            sense of concern and lack of confidence in the path to war that seems to lie
            ahead.


            --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

            Thousands Oppose a Rush to War
            Chill Doesn't Cool Fury Over U.S. Stand on Iraq
            By Manny Fernandez and Justin Blum
            Washington Post Staff Writers
            Sunday, January 19, 2003; Page A01
            Click here to view the full Washington Post article.

            Tens of thousands of antiwar demonstrators converged on Washington yesterday,
            making a thunderous presence
            in the bitter cold and assembling in the shadow of the Capitol dome to oppose a
            U.S. military strike against
            Iraq.
            • kochanka To byl kretyn Daniel 21.01.03, 03:21

          • Gość: PeaceAction Re: Rodzice z Brooklyna za pokojem IP: 168.103.126.* 21.01.03, 03:16
            Tuesday January 21, 7:30 pm: General open working meeting of Brooklyn
            Parents for Peace and Brooklyn Heights Peace Action at Brooklyn Society
            for Ethical Culture. 53 Prospect Park West between First and Second
            Streets in Park Slope. Please join us! Everybody is needed in the effort
            to stop a war against Iraq before it starts!

            Save the date: Saturday February 15: Major national demonstration in
            NYC to show opposition to war against Iraq.

            Look for our ad Brooklyn Says No! to War Against Iraq, in circulation
            this week in the Courier Life papers (issue dated Jan. 20).

            For more information, respond by e-mail, call 718-624-5921, or visit
            our web-site www.brooklynpeace.org

            Please join us in expressing hope by taking action, for peace and
            justice,

            Henry Florsheim and Jaki Williams Florsheim
            Brooklyn Heights Peace Action

            Rusti Eisenberg and Charlotte Phillips
            Brooklyn Parents for Peace
            _______________________________________________
            brooklynpeace mailing list
            brooklynpeace@lists.brooklynpeace.org
            lists.brooklynpeace.org/mailman/listinfo/brooklynpeace
            • kochanka To byl cmok Daniel 21.01.03, 03:22

          • Gość: VoteNoWar Re: Komentarze prasy USA po 18.1.03 IP: 168.103.126.* 21.01.03, 03:16


            An Open Letter to the VoteNoWar Membership and to the Anti-War Movement (please
            re-forward and post):

            The political impact of Saturday’s massive anti-war demonstrations organized by
            International A.N.S.W.E.R. can already be seen. Today’s New York Times
            editorial, “A Stirring in the Nation,” reflects that the anti-war movement
            represents millions of people in the United States and cannot be discounted.
            Together we have shattered the myth conjured by politicians, by the media which
            have dutifully echoed Bush’s calls for war, and by those who profit from war
            that there is a consensus of support in the United States for Bush’s war of
            aggression against Iraq.

            Now, even the New York Times, which has a declared policy of support for the
            Bush Administration’s goals in Iraq, cannot deny the breadth and strength of
            the movement that you and so many thousands have built.

            Today’s NYT editorial signifies that a growing section of the political
            establishment fears the dynamic rise of the U.S. anti-war movement, and is
            deeply concerned that Bush's rush towards war will have a destabilizing impact
            on the political system as a whole.

            The editorial also reflects what we have said all along: it is the opposition
            of the people of the United States and the world that constitutes the single
            biggest obstacle to the Bush Administration as it rushes towards war. (See
            below for the NYT editorial and additional coverage of the demonstrations from
            the Washington Post, LA Times and SF Chronicle.)

            Reuters, Molly Riley

            The rising tide of the anti-war movement cannot be ignored. Half a million
            people braved the coldest weather of the year in a march in Washington, D.C.
            Over 200,000 demonstrated at the A.N.S.W.E.R. demonstration in San Francisco,
            and large crowds gathered in local January 18 actions, including more than
            20,000 in Portland, 5,000 in Tucson, 4,000 in Albuquerque, and in many other
            cities. Hundreds of thousands more joined demonstrations in over 30 countries.

            Now is the time for the movement to intensify activity at the local and
            regional level as part of worldwide anti-war movement. On January 18, the
            A.N.S.W.E.R. Coalition called for a nationally coordinated day of local
            protests at Federal buildings on Wednesday, January 29, the day following
            Bush's State of the Union address, which is expected to be a 'war speech.'

            On January 18, the A.N.S.W.E.R. Coalition called for the U.S. movement to
            support the call issued from the European movement for mass anti-war
            demonstrations on February 15. There will be demonstrations in thousands of
            cities across the country and around the world on February 15. A.N.S.W.E.R.
            joins with UFPJ and hundreds of other organizations who will be mobilizing for
            the NYC action. The February 15 protest will be part of the Week of Anti-War
            Resistance from February 13 to
            February 21.

            We need your help to keep this movement strong as we build on the
            accomplishments of January 18. The VoteNoWar Campaign relies on the generous
            donations of individuals like you. At this critical moment, we ask that you
            contribute what you can to keep the momentum that we have all build together.
            We are making a difference. You can make an online tax deductible contribution
            by credit card, or find out where to send a tax deductible donation by check,
            by clicking here.

            Look out in your e-mail box, in the coming days, for even more detail on next
            steps and upcoming events from VoteNoWar.

            In solidarity,

            All of us at VoteNoWar.org

            This open letter was originally dispatched via e-mail to our VoteNoWar members.
            If it was forwarded to you, and you would like to receive communications from
            us about upcoming events and educational campaigns, then please Click here to
            subscribe.. If you no longer wish to be on our e-mail, list then simply Click
            here to unsubscribe..


            --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

            [The New York Times editorial, and excerpts from articles appearing in the
            Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times and the San Francisco Chronicle follow
            below]

            A Stirring in the Nation
            New York Times Editorial Page
            January 20, 2003
            A largely missing ingredient in the nascent debate about invading Iraq showed
            up on the streets of major cities over the weekend as crowds of peaceable
            protesters marched in a demand to be heard. They represented what appears to be
            a large segment of the American public that remains unconvinced that the Iraqi
            threat warrants the use of military force at this juncture.

            Denouncing the war plan as an administration idée fixe that will undermine
            America's standing in the world, stir unrest in the Mideast and damage the
            American economy, the protesters in Washington massed on Saturday for what
            police described as the largest antiwar rally at the Capitol since the Vietnam
            era. It was impressive for the obvious mainstream roots of the marchers — from
            young college students to grayheads with vivid protest memories of the 60's.
            They gathered from near and far by the tens of thousands, galvanized by the
            possibility that President Bush will soon order American forces to attack Iraq
            even without the approval of the United Nations Security Council.

            Mr. Bush and his war cabinet would be wise to see the demonstrators as a clear
            sign that noticeable numbers of Americans no longer feel obliged to salute the
            administration's plans because of the shock of Sept. 11 and that many harbor
            serious doubts about his march toward war. The protesters are raising some
            nuanced questions in the name of patriotism about the premises, cost and
            aftermath of the war the president is contemplating. Millions of Americans who
            did not march share the concerns and have yet to hear Mr. Bush make a
            persuasive case that combat operations are the only way to respond to Saddam
            Hussein. Mr. Bush and his war cabinet would be wise to see the demonstrators as
            a clear sign that noticeable numbers of Americans no longer feel obliged to
            salute the administration's plans because of the shock of Sept. 11 and that
            many harbor serious doubts about his march toward war.

            Other protests will be emphasizing civil disobedience in the name of Martin
            Luther King Jr. But any graphic moments to come of confrontation and arrest
            should be seen in the far broader context of the Capitol scene: peaceable
            throngs of mainstream Americans came forward demanding more of a dialogue from
            political leaders. Mr. Bush and his aides, to their credit, welcomed the
            demonstrations as a healthy manifestation of American democracy at work. We
            hope that spirit will endure in the weeks ahead if differences deepen and a
            noisier antiwar movement develops. These protests are the tip of a far broader
            sense of concern and lack of confidence in the path to war that seems to lie
            ahead.


            --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

            Thousands Oppose a Rush to War
            Chill Doesn't Cool Fury Over U.S. Stand on Iraq
            By Manny Fernandez and Justin Blum
            Washington Post Staff Writers
            Sunday, January 19, 2003; Page A01
            Click here to view the full Washington Post article.

            Tens of thousands of antiwar demonstrators converged on Washington yesterday,
            making a thunderous presence
            in the bitter cold and assembling in the shadow of the Capitol dome to oppose a
            U.S. military strike against
            Iraq.

            Throughout a morning rally on the Mall and an afternoon march to the Washington
            Navy Yard in Southeast, activists criticized the Bush administration for
            rushing into a war that they claimed would kill thousands of Iraqi civilians,
            spell disaster for the national economy and set a dangerous and unjustified
            first-strike precedent for U.S. foreign policy.

            They delivered that message on a
            • kochanka znowu daniel 21.01.03, 03:22

          • kochanka to byl wariat Daniel 21.01.03, 03:20

        • kochanka To byl klamca Daniel 21.01.03, 03:20

          • Gość: - Re: To byl zomowiec Kochanka IP: 168.103.126.* 21.01.03, 15:00
            Dlaczegp GW toleruje Zomowca wojo/Kochanka ? Moze ktos z GW wyjasni jego
            kariere na lanach Forum?
      • Gość: |v|rowa Re: I co z tego IP: 12.6.221.* 23.01.03, 17:57
        www2.gazeta.pl/forum/794674,30353,794652.html?f=50&w=4364749
Inne wątki na temat:
Pełna wersja