Anti War crowd sinks to yet another new low

[Lefty Scaevola]

I bet they have a new police chief in the near future.

[Bereta_Eder]

I'm quite sure that burning american flags is way better than burning Iraqi children.

Of course some may disagree.

[Traianvs]

Not a very wise thing to do of those troublemakers, all they have accomplished is putting the anti-war ppl in a bad perspective!

The warmongers can now use this against the anti-war people and that's annoying... I hope Shi has enough brains to see that you don't have to generalize this (although the topic title is a bit fishy!!!) and that not everybody is this drastic in showing their disgust in a war that's not needed.


Anyway who gives a damn about flags and garbage anyway, it's just "stuff" ... You can get that stuff back again anyway so you shouldn't make a big deal out of it. I at least never attach emotional value to mere objects =>because it's pointless (it's like ppl in catholic churches worshipping Jesus' statue or something!!!)

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Jules
First of all, how do we even know these were really anti-war protestors as opposed to a bunch of juvenile delinquents out for a vandalism spree? The article does not explain how they were anti-war demonstrators, except that the target happened to be a 9-11 memorial, which IMO does not prove their intent.

I think you have been ignored. Too bad.

[Arrian]

Yeah, random delinquents on a vandalism spree would have brought the Bob Dylan song along. Sure.

Generalizing is bad, m'kay? But these SPECIFIC peeps are morons.

-Arrian

[Wernazuma III]

Azazel: Black and white thinking is not restricted to the US alone and I didn't say this.
Nor was that part meant as generalization against all Americans. I only have to come here to find a good bunch of very nice Americans who know well to differentiate - no doubt about that.
I was actually making a completely different point. Those people who did this actually jumped on the same train that divides the world in good and bad and nothing in between. It happens a lot in the US right now: "Who is not for us is against us" is the current doctrine of Bush and obviously widely spread. Sorry to call it "American" if obviously Bush and his administration are following such a pattern. Hey, those people say: "grief about 9/11=pro Iraq war=just=American" and the rest is unpatriotic.
Those flag-burning people were idiots enough to jump on the train and say "because we don't like Bush and the war in Iraq we have to think 9/11 was good"
Black and white thinking happens everywhere in this world, but in America it booms since 9/11 and Bush is acting accordingly. The reason why it's inherently American is that the action centers around this 9/11 complex. I'd like to derive my right to call it "American" from the fact that Bush was democratically elected, but lamentably he wasn't

[Oerdin]

Originally posted by Lefty Scaevola
Not when someone else owns the flag.

There is no law outlawing flag burning. Republicans tried to set one up in the 1980s but the Supreme Court struck it down as a violation of the Right to Free Speech. That got a few Republicans talking about ammending the Constitution but nothing ever came from it.

[orange]

Completely illegal

It's a shame for morons like this to be lumped in with the 'anti-war crowd' Destruction of private property, especially a peaceful memorial site, is disgusting

[DaShi]

[Az]

Werna: you're still piling up all americans into a single way of thinking, or just making a "generalization", which is the same bad. I just think that this is unfair.

[Sava]

This is a terrible act... but what's worse is the moronic assertion that this was the action of the "Anti-War Crowd". Morons on both sides of this issue are ruining things.

[Gibsie]

Ahh, the work of true pacifists!

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Shi Huangdi
"perhabs shi, youd like to enforce the sedition act of 1918..."

I'd just like the anti-war crowd to start demonstrating decency and tact.

Of course, you conveniently smear the entire "anti war crowd" with the assinine and malicious actions of a few. I suppose if some "pro war crowd" racist decides to help things along by vandalising a mosque, it would be equally appropriate to propagandize that as representative of the "pro war crowd."

[Chris 62]

The point that seems to have escaped the appolgists of this, is the memorial is ALSO PROTECTED FREE SPEECH.

By destroying it, they violated the 1st amendment right of EVERY PERSON that put something there.

If you follow this logic all the way, pro-war protesters are now free to destroy ANY anti-war sign they see, as it's their "free speech".

That door swings both ways, and I'm surprised there were morons who would defend this action NO MATTER if your pro war or not.

Shows what YOUR morals truly are.

[Nubclear]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat


Of course, you conveniently smear the entire "anti war crowd" with the assinine and malicious actions of a few. I suppose if some "pro war crowd" racist decides to help things along by vandalising a mosque, it would be equally appropriate to propagandize that as representative of the "pro war crowd."

There was an assasination attempt here in Salt Lake City against the owner of a Pakistani/Indian resturant. I hear the gunman yelled "DIE TERRORIST!!!" as he drove by, but thats unconfirmed.

[DaShi]

Must have been pro-war.

[Sava]

I haven't seen anyone defending this action. Some people have graduated from going through life with blinders on to what I call: "Imagination Apolyton".

It seems everyone, anti-war, pro-war, has condemned this criminal act. And unfortunately, some have stereotyped these criminals as representing the "anti-war" stance.

[Hobbes]

Burn a flag for freedom! Woo!

[Sava]

Burning the flag is disgusting... and anyone who does so crosses the line from protestor to complete moron.

but it should be legal... as I've said before, in America, you have the freedom to be a complete dumbass.

[Nubclear]

Originally posted by DaShi
Must have been pro-war.

Yep. Pro-war people murder others.

[Q Classic]

see, not everyone who is anti-war is doing these things.

john mearsheimer, one of the foremost realists in the field of international relations, is against it. and he's usually a hawk, too. indeed, his work helped form some of the basis for the bush squad's realist outlook.
yet mearsheimer doesn't want to go to war.

to equate him as an anti-war professor to these goons as anti-war bastards is a fallacy.

just like in the pro-war category, you have many varying viewpoints, each with their own reasons, one cannot say that all anti-war people will act the same.

[Kirnwaffen]

"For this to be vandalism, there had to be an ill-will intent,' he said.

Since when has vandalism had anything to do with intent? My understanding was that destruction of property in any form was considered vandalism. Anyway, this just seems a little ridiculous. Consider the implications: I'm against PETA's recent advertising campaign. I therefore decide to throw rocks through the windows at PETA headquarters in protest, without ill-will intent, as my intent is to protest. So, assuming that there is no risk of injury to anyone near by, the four officers behind me simply stand and watch?

[Ben Kenobi]

Not a very wise thing to do of those troublemakers, all they have accomplished is putting the anti-war ppl in a bad perspective!

Indeed. Nothing of substance will be accomplished or changed except through peaceful means.

This is why I work the back corners no one sees, rather than to stand with the hooligans outside.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Chris 62
The point that seems to have escaped the appolgists of this, is the memorial is ALSO PROTECTED FREE SPEECH.

By destroying it, they violated the 1st amendment right of EVERY PERSON that put something there.

If you follow this logic all the way, pro-war protesters are now free to destroy ANY anti-war sign they see, as it's their "free speech".

That door swings both ways, and I'm surprised there were morons who would defend this action NO MATTER if your pro war or not.

Shows what YOUR morals truly are.

If they're on public property without authorisation, feel free. I feel free to tear down flyers posted on lampposts I don't like when I'm out and about. But tearing down something like a campaign poster can get you arrested, IIRC, because they usually have permits.

And these idiots tore something down on private property without the owner's authorisation. So they should get tossed in the clink.

I don't undertand the problem sme people are having with this concept. And the "anti war crowd" smear tactic is absolutely fabulous.

I'm sure that anti-Arab bigots support a war on Iraq. Therefore those who support war on Iraq are anti-Arab bigots.

[Wernazuma III]

Originally posted by Azazel
Werna: you're still piling up all americans into a single way of thinking, or just making a "generalization", which is the same bad. I just think that this is unfair.

Sorry, I won't come posting yet another elaborate post to counter a one or two liner , but it seems to be a good idea to reread my second article as I've made clear that I don't pile up Americans into one way of thinking.

[Sava]

A better thread would have been titled "Criminals vandalize memorials and US flag". But someone had to draw conclusions and spin it to suit his own distorted view of the people he doesn't agree with.

Frogger
You are so correct. Painting all the pro-war people as anti-Arab bigots is just as bad as this crap.

[Kramerman]

Originally posted by Lancer
What a bunch of low life nasty idiots.

To desecrate a memorial to the dead of 9/11.

This country needs hardship. So many people here lack character...

thats what i say. let them rot a few years in a vietnamese prison camp, adn then maybe they might be thankful for their freedoms

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Kirnwaffen
Since when has vandalism had anything to do with intent? My understanding was that destruction of property in any form was considered vandalism.

What if it's an accident? Not intended = accident.

[Ned]

I hardly think vandalism is free speech. Something doesn't smell right at all here. The cops should have intervened. But they didn't. Is there a case that held that under these kind of circumstances they have to stand aside and let the destruction continue?

[orange]

I'm VERY surprised the cops didn't intervene, actually.