Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
![]() |
|
London Transport (uk.transport.london) Discussion of all forms of transport in London. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
The fetaured link states:-
" March to Trafalgar Square where a statue of George Bush will be pulled down. This event will continue until 7pm to allow for people coming from work. If there is only one STOP BU$H event that you can make - this is the one." Presumably these vile and odious morons actually believe George Bush is more evil than Saddam. Just WHAT are they trying to stop Bush form doing? Presumably they'd like to have Saddam back - George Galloway eat your heart out! And don't forget that Ken will be spending our hard--earned taxes on entertaining some of these "anti Bush/ Blair" no-hopers! Pity those of us trying to EARN a living and trying to get around the City, instead of planning and going on demonstrations that will achieve absolutely nothing. Load of timewasters - a pox on all their houses. Marc. |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
I don't believe Bush is evil. I do believe he's potentially a bigger threat
to world security. After all, we already _know_ he has access to Weapons of Mass Destruction. "Mait001" wrote in message ... The fetaured link states:- " March to Trafalgar Square where a statue of George Bush will be pulled down. This event will continue until 7pm to allow for people coming from work. If there is only one STOP BU$H event that you can make - this is the one." Presumably these vile and odious morons actually believe George Bush is more evil than Saddam. Just WHAT are they trying to stop Bush form doing? Presumably they'd like to have Saddam back - George Galloway eat your heart out! And don't forget that Ken will be spending our hard--earned taxes on entertaining some of these "anti Bush/ Blair" no-hopers! Pity those of us trying to EARN a living and trying to get around the City, instead of planning and going on demonstrations that will achieve absolutely nothing. Load of timewasters - a pox on all their houses. Marc. |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
I don't believe Bush is evil. I do believe he's potentially a bigger threat
to world security. After all, we already _know_ he has access to Weapons of Mass Destruction. And you have evidence that he has used them against anyone or has threatened to do so? (Apart from against evil dictators and world terrorists, that is). Those so quick to condemn Bush (and with him everything that America stands for) should recall, especially during Remembrancetide, that it is highly unlikely that we would be living in anything like the relative peace and security we now have, following the Allies' victory in World War Two, without the Americans' support in Europe and the Far East. Marc. |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Mait001" wrote in message
... I don't believe Bush is evil. I do believe he's potentially a bigger threat to world security. After all, we already _know_ he has access to Weapons of Mass Destruction. And you have evidence that he has used them against anyone or has threatened to do so? (Apart from against evil dictators and world terrorists, that is). No, but his father did, in Gulf War I - depleted Uranium. Hussein fired first, yes, but that doesn't alter the fact that the US is the only coutnry in the world to have used nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. That's a damn sight more evidence than Hans Blix ever claimed to have found in Iraq. Those so quick to condemn Bush (and with him everything that America stands for) Thank you for that typical conservative kneejerk reaction. Condemning the man is condemning neither the office nor the state - you're a lawyer, you're intelligent, so why do you insist on misunderstanding that? The circumstances under which George Bush won the 2000 election are at best dubious, and I find both his domestic policy (tax cuts for the rich, while millions go without health insurance) and his foreign policy (refusing to sign the Kyoto treaty, and flouting the UN and other international bodies) despicable. He scares me more than Saddam ever did, because - while I would never accuse Bush of being anywhere near as evil as Hussein - he is a hell of a lot more powerful. should recall, especially during Remembrancetide, that it is highly unlikely that we would be living in anything like the relative peace and security we now have, following the Allies' victory in World War Two, without the Americans' support in Europe and the Far East. I agree, and am grateful. I don't see what that's got to do with the current situation though. If someone saved me from being mugged, grateful as I'd be, I would still be pretty irritated if they dragged me into a brawl ten minute s later. Defend George Bush, by all means, but please don't be so condescending to those of us who can't stand the man. Jonn |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Jonn Elledge" wrote in message
... "Mait001" wrote in message ... I don't believe Bush is evil. I do believe he's potentially a bigger threat to world security. After all, we already _know_ he has access to Weapons of Mass Destruction. And you have evidence that he has used them against anyone or has threatened to do so? (Apart from against evil dictators and world terrorists, that is). No, but his father did, in Gulf War I - depleted Uranium. I should point out, before anyone jumps on the obvious point, that I was not intending to deny that Saddam was an "evil dictator", merely that I phrased that point badly. Bush Snr did, however, use WMDs in Iraq in 1991 - and it wasn't the evil dictator that they hit, but his army, many of whom were terrified conscripts who would no doubt have been glad to see the back of their country's leader. And probably would have done, had the US backed the rebellions that happened after the war ended instead of stepping back. Jonn |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Jonn, I appreciate the senitments you express, but I would suggest that the
vast majority of those who demonstrate next week, and did so on the previous marches, are the usual anti-capitalist rent-a-demo anarchists who despise America for a number of disparate reasons, and would demonstrate against Bush even if he'd just found a painless cure for World poverty. People like Pat Arrowsmith who actually disrupted the Court in which I was appearing at Highgate two days ago. She started hurling verbal abuse at the District Judge and her no-hope supporters in the public gallery started to join in. What an appalling shower. Marc. |
#7
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Mait001" wrote in message
... Jonn, I appreciate the senitments you express, but I would suggest that the vast majority of those who demonstrate next week, and did so on the previous marches, are the usual anti-capitalist rent-a-demo anarchists who despise America for a number of disparate reasons, and would demonstrate against Bush even if he'd just found a painless cure for World poverty. I agree that there is a significant bandwagon affect - it scared the crap out of me commuting through Westminster the day the war started, and I was against it. However, I think the scale of protests planned do suggest something about a significant feeling against George Bush personally - you notice that Clinton (who was hardly whiter than white - ask the Sudanese) was never greeted in this way. If Bush had solved world poverty, this wouldn't be happening; but he is seen as a warmongering economic elitist. Basically, I think we're looking at an anti-war movement that happens to include some anti-capitalists rather than the mob of anarchists you describe. (I don't even think all the anti-capitalists are of the same ilk - a lot of them will be for fair (rather than free) trade, and not the complete breakdown of global capitalisation and the rule of law.) People like Pat Arrowsmith who actually disrupted the Court in which I was appearing at Highgate two days ago. She started hurling verbal abuse at the District Judge and her no-hope supporters in the public gallery started to join in. What an appalling shower. I don't disagree that some of the anti-war movement - as with any movement of any size - are going to be over the top, selfish, or unpleasant. The case you describe sounds particularly unpleasant, and I appreciate that it must have been quite nasty to see. There are better ways to protest. However, I do think it's disingenous to tar everyone with the same brush. Protest is a part of a healthy democracy. I also wish that London wasn't going to grind to a halt next week, but I'd much rather have seen the President take the hint and cancel the visit than I would people stay quiet on global issues that they feel so strongly about. There's a quote about "all that is required for evil to triumph" that seems aposite here, but I can't remember for the life of me who said it. Jonn |
#9
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#10
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Anyone here know who is organising the march?
I am serioulsy consdiering billing them because thier actions have meant I have had to cancel a planned trip with all the resulting problems that causes. I am seriously consdering sending the organisers of the march a bill for my time and inconvenience. Perhaps some of the long suffering commuters, earners and vistors to the capital should also bill the organisers, who from what I have heard seem to be unwilling to consider that others have a right to earn a living or enjoy london in 'peace'. Find me an actionable defendant, with sufficient funds to satisfy a judgement and costs, and I will draft the pleadings for you free of charge! Marc. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
The UK march agaimst Bush | London Transport | |||
The UK march agaimst Bush | London Transport | |||
The UK march agaimst Bush | London Transport | |||
The UK march agaimst Bush | London Transport | |||
The UK march agaimst Bush | London Transport |