top
Iraq
Iraq
Indybay
Indybay
Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz
Indybay
Regions
Indybay Regions North Coast Central Valley North Bay East Bay South Bay San Francisco Peninsula Santa Cruz IMC - Independent Media Center for the Monterey Bay Area North Coast Central Valley North Bay East Bay South Bay San Francisco Peninsula Santa Cruz IMC - Independent Media Center for the Monterey Bay Area California United States International Americas Haiti Iraq Palestine Afghanistan
Topics
Newswire
Calendar
Features
From the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
Related Categories: Iraq
Bush in Stockton - buses and stuff
by vic
Friday Aug 16th, 2002 3:40 PM
The focus of the protest appears to be No War in Iraq
NO WAR ON IRAQ
SF CARAVAN TO PROTEST BUSH FRIDAY IN STOCKTON, CA!
Buses leave SF at 7:30 AM. Back to SF by 3 PM
RSVP to peace [at] globalexchange.org or 415-255-7296 x666

Let’s send a loud and clear message to George Bush when he visits California
next Friday: No War on Iraq! Our goal is to have hundreds of people greet Bush
in Stockton at 10 AM as he headlines a fundraiser for Bill Simon, the Republican
candidate for governor. Let’s stop this war before it starts!

WHAT: No War on Iraq Protest During President Bush’s Visit to Stockton, CA

WHEN: Friday, August 23, 7:30 AM buses leave SF; arrive in Stockton by10 AM

WHERE: Meet at 16th and Mission Streets in San Francisco to catch the bus; the
exact address of the Stockton event hasn’t yet been announced

WHO: Global Exchange is organizing the protest & buses; International Action
Center is also calling for a protest in Stockton at 10 AM on Friday

COST: Donation of $10 requested to help pay for the bus rentals. No one turned
away for lack of funds.

RSVP: RSVP as soon as possible to confirm number of buses needed. Email
peace [at] globalexchange.org or call 415-255-7296 x666

*If you are in other parts of Northern California, please organize caravans from
your town. Call us and let us know you are coming (415) 255-7296 x263

A FEW REASONS WHY THE U.S. SHOULD NOT START A WAR AGAINST IRAQ

• Iraq does not pose an urgent threat to the United States
The Bush Administration has provided no evidence for its claims that Iraq is
actively trying to obtain weapons of mass destruction. By contrast, former U.N.
weapons inspectors say that they succeeded during the 1990s in destroying or
dismantling every major factory associated with prohibited weapons manufacture
and the majority of the weapons produced by Iraq. Upon his return from a recent
two-week stay in Iraq, Hans von Sponeck, a former U.N. humanitarian aid
coordinator for Iraq, said, \\\"The U.S. Department of Defense and the CIA know
perfectly well that today\\\'s Iraq poses no threat to anyone in the region, let
alone in the United States. To argue otherwise is dishonest.\\\"

•There is no international support for a war on Iraq
Our European and Arab allies oppose military intervention. So do Iraq’s
neighbors—Turkey, Jordan and even Kuwait. The United Nations Secretary General
Kofi Annan has called on the U.S. to avoid a military assault on Iraq while
violence still rages between Israelis and Palestinians. This situation is a far
cry from the international alliance that existed during the Persian Gulf War or
the alliance that supported the military campaign in Afghanistan.

•The U.S. should not become a first-strike nation
It would be unprecedented for the United States to make a pre-emptive strike
against Iraq that was not a response to an act of aggression committed against
America or its allies. Additionally, it would be illegal under international
law. War should be a last resort among the tools of U.S. foreign policy, not a
first resort. Diplomacy and weapons inspections are other alternatives for
dealing with U.S. concerns about Iraq.

•A war against Iraq will make Americans LESS safe, not more safe An unprovoked attack on Iraq may well destabilize the Middle East, which is already reeling from the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians. It will weaken our relationships with our allies, who wholeheartedly oppose a war against Iraq. It will fan the flames of terrorism by giving terrorists another reason to hate the United States. And it will result, as all wars do, in the deaths of many innocent people, both Americans and Iraqis.

•We can find much better uses for $80 billion of our tax dollars
The last war with Iraq cost $80 billion (in today’s dollars). At that time our allies paid 80 percent of the bill. This time around they won’t. With an economic recession in gear and budget deficits already expanding, we call ill afford to spend such an enormous amount of money on a military venture.

PLEASE HELP US STOP THIS WAR BEFORE IT STARTS. GET ON THE BUS TO STOCKTON.

OTHER THINGS YOU CAN DO:

• Call your Senators and Representatives and tell them to stop the Bush
Administration from undertaking a military assault against Iraq. Also ask them
to hold hearings on Iraq that include a full range of experts on Iraq—including
those who oppose the planned U.S. war.

Nancy Pelosi, SF office: (415)556-4862
DC office: (202) 225-4965; email: sf.nancy [at] mail.house.gov

Dianne Feinstein, SF office: 415/393-0707
DC office: (202) 224-3841; Fax: (202) 228-3954

Barbara Boxer, SF office: 415-403-0100, fax 415-956-6701
DC office: 202-224-3553

•Help us distribute these flyers at subway stations, university campuses,
shopping malls and other gathering places throughout California and the United
States. Please feel free to reprint them and change the names of the people to
contact, depending on the state where you’re located. Senators’ contact
information is at http://www.senate.gov. Representatives at http://www.house.gov.

•Join the national mobilization to stop the war on Iraq by organizing a protest
in your community. Check http://www.unitedforpeace.org for upcoming national days of
action and for more information and resources. Also tell us about your protest
plans by writing to info [at] unitedforpeace.org.

Global Exchange/United for Peace, 2017 Mission Street, Suite 303, San Francisco,
CA 94110, tel. (415) 255-7296, peace [at] globalexchange.org.
Add Your Comments

Comments  (Hide Comments)

by cp
Friday Aug 16th, 2002 4:12 PM
Yeah, Bush and his inner-circle seem to have single-mindedly planned the Iraq invasion all by themselves. They didn't consult our population but instead are scheming how to sell it to us via fear of nuclear weapons even though Iraq doesn't even have water pipes or basic infrastructure right now. Even awful conservatives like Dick Armey are against it, and Henry Kissinger met with Colin Powell to plan how to get the administration to put a halt to this, and the rest of the world has a stark difference of opinion: http://www.nytimes.com/2002/08/16/international/middleeast/16IRAQ.html
or if directed to pay archive, try http://partners.nytimes.com/2002/08/16/international/middleeast/16IRAQ.html
by Merwin
Monday Aug 19th, 2002 9:41 AM
All united against an attack on Iraq.

Only in America!
by Spock
Monday Aug 19th, 2002 10:27 PM
" a bunch of drugged-out losers!"

Head games: name calling
Bad names have played a tremendously powerful role in the history of the world and in our own individual development. They have ruined reputations, stirred men and women to outstanding accomplishments, sent others to prison cells, and made men mad enough to enter battle and slaughter their fellowmen. They have been and are applied to other people, groups, gangs, tribes, colleges, political parties, neighborhoods, states, sections of the country, nations, and races." (Institute for Propaganda Analysis, 1938)

The name-calling technique links a person, or idea, to a negative symbol. The propagandist who uses this technique hopes that the audience will reject the person or the idea on the basis of the negative symbol, instead of looking at the available evidence.

The most obvious type of name calling involves "bad names." For example, consider the following:

Commie
Fascist
Pig
Yuppie Scum
Bum
Queer
Feminazi

A more subtle form of name-calling involves words or phrases that are selected because they possess a negative emotional charge. Those who oppose budget cuts may characterize fiscally conservative politicians as "stingy." Supporters might prefer to describe them as "thrifty." Both words refer to the same behavior, but they have very different connotations. Other examples of negatively charged words include:

social engineering
radical
stingy
counter-culture

The name-calling technique was first identified by the Institute for Propaganda Analysis (IPA) in 1938. According to the IPA, we should ask ourselves the following questions when we spot an example of name-calling.

What does the name mean?

Does the idea in question have a legitimate connection with the real meaning of the name?

Is an idea that serves my best interests being dismissed through giving it a name I don't like?

Leaving the name out of consideration, what are the merits of the idea itself?
by Don Houser
Thursday Aug 22nd, 2002 1:14 PM
Why so much hate, I Pray daily for our President.
by jim
Thursday Aug 22nd, 2002 1:37 PM
hate? yeah idunno. name calling seems to be some disease the conservatives have. profanity too.
by jim
Thursday Aug 22nd, 2002 1:38 PM
hate? yeah idunno. name calling seems to be some disease the conservatives have. profanity too.
by AF1
Thursday Aug 22nd, 2002 2:21 PM
a 100000 people show up and maybe this can be taken seriously but anything less and youre irrelevant which you are anyway and besides the secret service and other officers of the law aren't gonna let you nuts anywhere near where bush is just like when he came back in april to san jose and there were around 300 or so who showed up and they got within maybe a mile which is too close for people who are the charley manson children of the world like the heavily armed and dangerious bay area activists who given the opportunity would murder the president have no doubt about it
by In his own imagination
Friday Aug 23rd, 2002 4:57 AM
AF1 sounds quite brilliant doesn't he?
<sarcasm>
by typical
Friday Aug 23rd, 2002 5:03 AM
trolldream.jpg
i wonder what trolls dream when they sleep
by John Hernandez (hernanjp1 [at] aol.com)
Friday Aug 23rd, 2002 9:50 AM
The most important reason not to invade another nation, specifically Iraq is that it's WRONG. It is Immoral and illegal- against internation law, UN charter and probably domestic laws and treaties as well. Who's next, Cuba? Korea? Iran? Canada? Mexico?
But if we insist on having this debate, at least state the real reasons for it: the Bushies can't stand to have someone not within their control determining what will happen to all that oil!
by K. Matthews
Friday Aug 23rd, 2002 2:04 PM
How in the world did people like this manage to steal the 2000 presidential election? Obviously not too bright.
by YBT
Friday Aug 23rd, 2002 2:09 PM
"How in the world did people like this manage to steal the 2000 presidential election? Obviously not too bright."

What does that say about people like you that let it happen?
by Mike Prince
Friday Aug 23rd, 2002 7:10 PM
It is your Patriotic Duty to protest a Vietnam War Deserter that stripped our Constitution, a 200 year old document that millions of Americans gave their lifes defending. He and Ilk need removing like a cancerous sore.

The Liberty Bell is ringing loudly in America, everywhere this Select Resident goes he is hounded by those that seek Freedom. Take back the House in 2002 so he can be impeached in timely fashion.
by gurb
Friday Aug 23rd, 2002 8:46 PM
You're talikng about Clinton I assume?
by jerky
Saturday Aug 24th, 2002 10:16 AM
Sounds alot more like Bush to me, but Clinton was a jackass too. He didn't do a thing about the child-murdering sanctions.
by Troy L
Monday Aug 26th, 2002 7:32 PM
I’m Proud to have Vice President Richard Cheney as America’s Vice President! His speech on Monday, August 26, 2002 regarding a pre-emptive strike on Iraq was right on the mark.

Saddam Hussein is a dictator who has attacked four countries in the Middle East alone, who has used chemical weapons against both Iranian and Iraqi civilians during the Iraq-Iran war, and who by his own speeches has shown no regard for human life and will kill innocents in mass again.

I want to go on the record thanking V.P. Cheney for his principled leadership in explaining to America and the international community that peace in the Middle East cannot exist as long as Saddam Hussein remains in power and Iraq’s weapons of mass-destruction program cannot be left intact. Cheney’s protective eye to save the United States, Middle East and World from the horrors of biological and possibly nuclear threats created by Saddam’s terror regime is very, very appreciated.

I have faith that United States will conquer this evil thru a fully committed effort against Iraqi. A military action in Iraq will impede the people of that nation who help produce weapons of terror to be used on Americans and others throughout the world. A fully committed military action of liberation from this terror regime will allow the US to stop Saddam’s campaigns of horrid butchery in its tracks.

Thank you again V.P. Cheney and our American Service men for your watchful eye on the War on Terror and those who would do harm to the citizens of the world.

Troy L

San Francisco
by Chris Gilles
Tuesday Aug 27th, 2002 5:30 PM
I find it extremely difficult to understand those who attempt to sound rational while speaking from a position on their knees with Bush's Dick in their mouth. Impeach King George II!!!!!
by GAG!!!
Tuesday Aug 27th, 2002 8:01 PM
Chris,

Then go ask your old lady how she does it.
by never mind (no)
Tuesday Sep 3rd, 2002 8:29 AM
At least the don't go around murdering the poor and the suffering and the ones that know reality from lies.
by Dostal
Thursday Sep 12th, 2002 6:32 AM
I read a notice on a demonstration against an attack on Iraq, an appalling event. These comments are shocking and barely literate. This does not show me a foreigner that Americans are educated or mature. These are the remarks of children
by Thess
Wednesday Sep 25th, 2002 7:22 PM
It's interesting when seemingly multi-cultural relatavists grow some morals and pronounce "Attacking any nation is wrong, period!" The basic purpose of a government is to protect the freedoms of it's citizens. This includes the God given right of life. When the government fails to fulfill this to the best of its abilities, it has failed.

Now the evidence against Iraq keeps coming out (Britain's Dossier), and UN weapons inspectors that don't have suspicious ties to Iraq agree that inspections were a failure as a whole.
Richard Butler Even Scott Ritter (curent darling child of the media) admitted that the UN failed utterly to enforce the inspections when he resigned
Our only other two options then, logicaly, are doing nothing and hoping won't attack us (I'm glad I don't live in a major city) and taking our Saddam by force.

You cry of unilateralism! We give you the U.S.-Britain-Australian-Italian alliance. You cry of lack of UN support! Bush gutted the UN's revelance.

If you guys would stop namecalling for a second you might actaully learn something here.
by kristen frank (kdf209 [at] hotmail.com)
Wednesday Mar 17th, 2004 11:07 AM
i was at this protest with a sign that read


60's are over, s.o.s. stuck on stupid.

everyone there looked as if they were following a flock.. how sad.
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!

Donate

donate now

$ 212.00 donated
in the past month

Get Involved

If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.

Publish

Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.

IMC Network