Some of my friends have tried to argue that diversity builds credibility. While this can be true, I do not believe it to be the case here. What’s happening is a lot of lefties claiming there’s support from the right and a few righties pointing to the swarm on the left. Neither side likes the other or is against the war for evenly remotely similar reasons, but coincidental agreement is seen as a credibility boost anyhow. Now, if those groups got together and formed a focused (i.e. no mission creep) anti-war effort, they might actually turn a few heads. Lefties, you can fight for abortion rights another day (though I really rather you protected the unborn as well as you protect other underdogs). Now is the time to participate in a unified front against the possible war in Iraq AND ONLY AGAINST THE WAR. Righties, ‘not yet’ is not as good ‘not moral’ or ‘not ethical’ or ‘not wise’. Got it, folks?
“As President Bush moves the nation closer to a military confrontation to force Iraqi President Saddam Hussein to give up his weapons of mass destruction, an array of domestic opinion-makers have been raising their voices against war.”
"Unless you fell asleep on Friday afternoon and didn’t wake up until Monday morning, you are aware that Pittsburgh hosted a peace rally that many have called the largest in about 30 years. Dubbed the ‘Convergence’ by its organizers, the weekend-long rally featured a parade through the South Side on Saturday and a similar march through Oakland Sunday afternoon. Responses to the gathering have been mixed, generally divided along lines of support or opposition to possible war with Iraq."
"Sunday was a day of protest throughout Oakland as thousands of demonstrators took to the streets to march against a war with Iraq. Creating a circus-like atmosphere, these activists were trying to send a message to the American people that war against Saddam is ill-considered. At least that was what the demonstration was supposed to be about. In reality, the parade along Forbes Avenue illustrated anti-Americanism at its ugliest. Protesters attacked the U.S. government with slogans that were on par with simple nursery rhymes. Most chants and signs featured ad hominem attacks against President Bush (e.g. ‘Bush eats pubes’) that were downright offensive. Such childishness does little to advance the cause of peace, but I don’t think the protesters care."
This is an interesting site that’s a rallying point for those opposed to current US anti-terrorist policies. While, I agree that we’re going too far, I do not believe it’s an issue of oil. Jerry says it better:
"I am very concerned about some of the privacy intrusions and some of the detainment policies of suspected terrorists, but I do not think of this as ‘war for oil’ transaction, and even most of the anti-war politicians do not stoop to such simplicity–if we want oil, we’ll drill in the ANWR or get it off the Russians. Sure the Iraqis have plenty, but the dangers and capital required are not good business. I do agree that we should protect the rights of those oppose ‘the war’, and we should not deem entire countries or peoples evil (regimes are a different matter!). This petition, therefore, is not in my name. :)"
The Not In Our Name Project is a national network of individuals and organizations committed to standing with the people of the world. As the Not in Our Name Pledge of Resistance states, "we believe that as people living in the United States it is our responsibility to resist the injustices done by our government, in our names." Our mission is to build, strengthen and expand resistance to stop the U.S. government’s entire course of war and repression being waged in the name of "fighting terrorism."