Join 3,374 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)


Anti-War Posters
February 23, 2003 7:31 AM   Subscribe

Make Love Not War - Again? The anti-war movement has all the best slogans. And quite rightly too. Which doesn't mean they're not still rehashed, unimaginative and lame. "Don't attack Iraq"? "Make tea, not war"? Don't make me laugh. What's the best you've come across, if at all? And why are the hawks so lacking in the most basic sense of humor?
posted by Carlos Quevedo (127 comments total)

 
though not strictly anti-war, the NYT mentioned one at the New York protests that I thought was amusing "EXTRA: Drunk Frat Boy Runs Country Into Ditch"
posted by yeahyeahyeahwhoo at 7:41 AM on February 23, 2003


a couple from the Raleigh demonstration last week:

"How did our oil get under their sand?" and
"A village in Texas has lost its idiot."
posted by yoga at 7:52 AM on February 23, 2003


My favorite: "less warring, more whoring!"
posted by amberglow at 7:58 AM on February 23, 2003


A couple from the march in London last weekend:
"Down With This Sort of Thing", alongside "Careful Now". [Father Ted humour may be lost on non-Brits]
Front: "Another American against the war". Back: "Bush is a lousy fuck and we hate him" [points for eloquence]
"I'm 17 and have already lost faith in western democracy." [poignant]
"If you want to kill things, get a playstation".
posted by Kiell at 8:08 AM on February 23, 2003


How about "A Real Man Knows When To Pull Out!" seen at the New York protest. (See the other slogans here).
posted by thatis at 8:15 AM on February 23, 2003


war is for dickheads.

and their friend misspelled tyranny.
posted by onedarkride at 8:21 AM on February 23, 2003


At the Belfast rally more than a few people had appropriated our local right wing loon, the Rev Dr.Ian Paisley's, classic "ULSTER SAYS NO!". Which was nice.
posted by Damienmce at 8:23 AM on February 23, 2003


The sloganeering was the thing that annoyed me most when I went to the Valentine's Day anti-war protest in Melbourne, Australia. I saw someone holding a banner that said: say no to GE, TXU and Rupert Murdoch.
TXU is a local electricity supplier. Rupert does seem to be pro-war (for pecuniary reasons), and GE are probably bad because they make munitions (although I have always thought the GE logo is absolutely gorgeous).
I was annoyed because I was there to say that I didn't want a war. I'm not particularly anti-GE or anti-TXU or anti-Rupert (I like the Simpsons). But I felt like I was being associated with this guy because of his irrelevant placard. I was embarasssed by it.
But 'Down With This Sort of Thing', that's a motto I could really get behind. Seriously.
posted by chrisgregory at 8:27 AM on February 23, 2003


My favorites from the NYC rally included "draft the Bush twins" and the guy holding with his hands his sign reading "the cops took my stick."
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 8:34 AM on February 23, 2003


needless to say, if the best solution you can come up with for a problem is war, then you aren't very clever.
posted by mcsweetie at 8:34 AM on February 23, 2003


WAR is TERROR - OK? Tynary Can SUCK A Nut biTch.

And our leaders aren't letting this guy influence our foreign policy? Shame on them. He's obviously studied and considered all of the issues very thoroughly... biTch.

(thanks for the link onedarkride)
posted by rusty at 8:58 AM on February 23, 2003


exhibit A: "No Muslims - No Terrorism," "ISLAM: A Religion Of Peace," "Screw The World Order," "Kick Dem Ass!," "Let's Roll(tm)," etc.
posted by mcsweetie at 9:08 AM on February 23, 2003


Tina for Peace - read the entire article. its worth it.
posted by specialk420 at 9:15 AM on February 23, 2003


In DC this past October:
Real eyes realize real lies
There is no way to peace—peace IS the way
O Believers, stand out firmly for justice as witnesses to God (held by a Muslim women’s group)
Apocalypse No!
Big oil at work – DANGER – Making the world safe for corporate America
How is war a pro-life action?
War is God's way of teaching Americans geography
End this BUSHIT
Preemption is a euphemism for aggression
“We have guided missiles and misguided men.” –Martin Luther King
We may have the might, but we don’t have the right
Fighting for peace is like making love for virginity
posted by win_k at 9:41 AM on February 23, 2003


If the anti-war contingent would expend their energy on practical ideas instead of puerile sloganeering, perhaps we would be having a more serious debate about this subject. The adolescent spirit of tacky street theatre, chanting, lame doggerel, and bitter agitprop is the main reason that the pacifist's position (assuming, perhaps wrongly, that pacifism is the impetus behind today's protestors) is being largely ignored. The next time you feel the urge to write a dopey and poorly-scanned metaphor involving the word "Bush" on a piece of poster board, take a deep breath and instead try to write a cogent paragraph where you argue your case with the gravity and reason deserved by as serious a geopolitical issue as the current situation. Waving clever signs may make for a fun Saturday afternoon, but it ultimately accomplishes nothing.
posted by sir walsingham at 9:42 AM on February 23, 2003


What Sir Walsingham said. Times a thousand. Is it any wonder so many take young "activists" with a grain of salt?
posted by Karl at 9:51 AM on February 23, 2003


Ah, but what am I saying? I just spotted the eloquent "Tynary Can SUCK A Nut biTch" sign and have decided that war, and indeed tynary, is a bad idea. Thank you, dopey young gentleman, thank you.
posted by Karl at 9:54 AM on February 23, 2003


Hear Hear Sir Walsingham!

Every time I see something glib on a sign, I might chuckle, but anyone who thinks that "no blood for oil" accurately conveys the gravity and complexity of this situation is an idiot.
posted by ednopantz at 9:55 AM on February 23, 2003


This article has a fine assortment of slogans, clever or otherwise, from Seattle's anti-war rally. My favorites (which may or may not be mentioned in the article) are:
"Whores, not wars" - carried by a trio of very tattooed women, with very sharp mohawks
"Unleash the dogs of peace" - sign attached to the side of a giant albino dog someone brought along. And I do mean giant.
"Whom would Jesus bomb?"
ooh, ooh, and let's not forget "Capitol Hill [ed: a Seattle neightborhood] queer jews against war". That took the cake.
posted by blindcarboncopy at 9:56 AM on February 23, 2003


"PUSSY LOVERS AGAINST BUSH"
posted by afx114 at 9:59 AM on February 23, 2003


ednopants: Is your meat-space name Kenneth W. Parton by a chance?

P.S. I agree with you. But I've been looking for an excuse to link to that article forever now :)
posted by blindcarboncopy at 10:00 AM on February 23, 2003


And why are the hawks so lacking in the most basic sense of humor?

Goodness - where did you get this idea? Conservatives enjoy the hell out the humor created by liberals (though much of the time liberals don't see it as humor). And indeed, create plenty of their own.



They can also get (almost) as snide and banal with one-liners. From Churchill's infamous "A liberal is a man with both feet planted firmly in the air.", to the more recent Perot "going to war without the French is like going fishing without an accordian" ... and hundreds of others ...

Stop Global Whining.

Vote Democrat. It's easier than thinking.

Annoy a liberal. Work hard and be happy.

I DO Work For Food!

Ax me bout Ebonics

To hell with the village, where are the parents?

Liberal: Businesses create oppression and governments create prosperity.

Liberal: Only listen to and respect the views of "open-minded" people who think like they do.
posted by MidasMulligan at 10:08 AM on February 23, 2003


Pull Your Plum And Peace Will Come!
posted by gravelshoes at 10:22 AM on February 23, 2003


"Three Reichs and you're out!" - DC protest. "I'm so mad about U.S. foreign policy that I made this sign!" , "The last person to listen to a bush wandered in the desert for forty years." and " The only bush I trust is my own " -SF, Feb 16. Let's try preemptive peace! - McMurdo Station Antarctica. "Plastic sheets and duct tape are petroleum products." - NYC Feb 15.
posted by gametone at 10:25 AM on February 23, 2003


I really enjoyed this one from Brussels. Translation: Monica, get busy with Bush also
posted by quarsan at 10:44 AM on February 23, 2003


The last person to listen to a bush wandered in the desert for forty years

anti-semitism seems to be a very strong undercurrent at the anti-war rallies
posted by Mick at 10:48 AM on February 23, 2003


One of my favorite sights was the clean-cut suit-wearing men with blood on their hands and faces holding signs saying Everything is Fine and yelling at the protesting crowd, "You don't have to be here. Go home!"
posted by poseur at 10:52 AM on February 23, 2003


midas -

Ax me bout Ebonics

nice one. thats good.....

you conservatives really take the cake.

"KARL ROVE, Bush's long-time political guru and White House advisor:
"As people do better, they start voting like Republicans...
...unless they have too much education and vote Democratic,
which proves there can be too much of a good thing."
posted by specialk420 at 11:00 AM on February 23, 2003


rusty: more here, but those were really the only crackheads out that day. i mean, other than the black-masked people with the "LET THE RICH FIGHT THE WAR" banner.

those kids were pretty fucked up on something, although i dont know what. (that statement carries a lot of weight coming from me.) when i went up to the guy in the black coat to chat, he responded with "uhhh..... what? i dont get it.."

the sign that the girl had was hand painted, which was kind of cool, but i mean.. couldn't they have put forth effort towards something a bit less childlike?
posted by onedarkride at 11:03 AM on February 23, 2003


Mick, you can't be serious. Speaking as a jew and anti-war bleeding-heart liberal commie pig-dog (one who wrote a several-paragraph argument on the subject, not just a slogan), anti-semitism is not an undercurrent at the rallies; making a pun about moses (a figure in christian mythology as well) is hardly an indication of prejudice.
posted by Tlogmer at 11:08 AM on February 23, 2003


My favorite is: "Regime change begins at home"
posted by freshgroundpepper at 11:12 AM on February 23, 2003


The problem with the existing debate is that it boils down to two arguments:

Pro-war: this war is necessary; we are reluctant but we will save the whole world from what is many times worse that may come in the future if we do not go to war now.

Anti-war: war never solves anything; there are other ways of persuasion, and while war seldom makes a bad situation better, it often makes an acceptable situation awful.

The pro-war argument presupposes data based upon pessimism, competition, fear, ignorance and xenophobia.

The anti-war argument idealizes the philosophy of cooperation, optimism, mutual benefit and the unbased assumption of universal reasonableness.

Until one side or the other can transcend speculation and wishful thinking, there will be no consensus by the undecided majority. Neither side can persuade without realistic and factual information, not hyperbole.
posted by kablam at 11:14 AM on February 23, 2003


sir walsingham, we live in a time of sound-bites and extremely expensive advertising campaigns which attempt to use the creativity of brilliant young minds to sway our behaviour, sometimes via slogans. This is normality.
From London - 'The only Bush I trust is my own'
'Rid the world of words of mass deception'
'Don't panic, I'm Islamic'
From NY - 'This Bush makes love not war'
Also, if anyone can explain the orange baby doll on the orange stick, I'd be glad.
chrisgregory - GE and NewsCorp could be seen as being liable for the war, if you conscribe to the idea of manufactured consent.
posted by asok at 11:16 AM on February 23, 2003


Waving clever signs may make for a fun Saturday afternoon, but it ultimately accomplishes nothing.

Protests like these are not about making cogent arguments. They are about expressing public outrage. Arguments are for op-ed pieces in magazines, newspapers, and the web. Clever signs and slogans are made for tv, radio, and public functions.

With few exceptions, cogent paragraph[s] where you argue your case with the gravity and reason largely fail in the realm of tv and radio, which is why "talk" programs in these media are largely dominated by demagogues who make simplistic arguments riddled with logical fallacies.
posted by moonbiter at 11:25 AM on February 23, 2003


Playing Devil's advocate here (I got this from a Fark photoshop contest, so it might not qualify as a real slogan):

I'm expressing my rights so that Iraqi's will never have the chance
posted by PenDevil at 11:26 AM on February 23, 2003


My favorite so far is probably the sexy woman in San Francisco who carried a "Bombshells, not bombs!" placard.
posted by insomnia_lj at 11:26 AM on February 23, 2003


... or maybe "Cockroaches for Armegeddon". That was good too.
posted by insomnia_lj at 11:27 AM on February 23, 2003


"Touch your Sac, Not Iraq"
posted by spidre at 11:37 AM on February 23, 2003


my faves: from http://masturbateforpeace.com

10. War is silly, whack your willy
9. War's no joke, stop and stroke!
8. War is heinous, thumb your anus
7. I'm going blind for mankind
6. Abuse your middle piece, not the Middle East
5. All we are saying, is give peace a wank
4. War is out, pound your trout
3. Touch your sack, not Iraq
2. My bush doesn't declare war
1. I cum in peace
posted by ruwan at 11:49 AM on February 23, 2003


From NYC:

"The only Bush I trust is my own"

"Why does Exxon's finger smell like Bush's asshole?"

and...

"Draft Midas Mulligan"
posted by mrbarrett.com at 12:02 PM on February 23, 2003


Conservatives aren't generally out in force developing humorous slogans because they realize the gravity of the situation. Meanwhile, the "antis" seem to be exhibiting some kind of genetic longing, and seizing on the opportunity to march against... something... anything. They don't posit any rational arguments, just a general anti-Bush screed. If the few who howl about Iraqi civilian casualties actually cared about Iraqi civilians, they should have been marching in the streets demanding Saddam's removal a decade ago. I suspect all many of them care about is showing up at the protest party with the cleverest sign.

That said, conservatives do recognize the need to sometimes fight fire with fire:



[more where that came from]
posted by Tubes at 12:04 PM on February 23, 2003


James Taranto's Opinion Journal has some great links to pictures of protest signs. My favorite is:

WHO NEEDS OIL? I RIDE THE BUS
posted by Frank Grimes at 12:09 PM on February 23, 2003


Why do conservatives feel the need to post full jpegs of signs and cartoons dealing with protests?
posted by raysmj at 12:28 PM on February 23, 2003


I'm glad war ended communism, Tubes. That communism was really grating on me!!
posted by jonson at 12:31 PM on February 23, 2003


From Hollywood, CA: "You should have voted".
posted by inviolable at 12:32 PM on February 23, 2003


"Conservatives aren't generally out in force developing humorous slogans because they realize the gravity of the situation."

Plus they're too busy working on sophomoric arguments.
posted by lathrop at 12:43 PM on February 23, 2003


I might be confused but wasn't it a Presidential proclamation, followed by a Constitutional amendment that ended slavery in America? Maybe that sign refered to England...no, I don't remember a war to end slavery there either.

It occurs to me that most propoganda sound-bites from the right attempt to appeal to some common pool of knowledge that we all share, and the left willfully ignores. I for one, find it ragingly funny how often they're incorrect, ill-informed, or just plain lying. If I hold an opinion or sign stating that Bush is a self-interested asshole, you can certainly disagree, but you can't prove me wrong. When someone holds a sign stating that war is good because it brought about the end of slavery, or communism, well that's certainly open to fact checking isn't it.
posted by Wulfgar! at 12:49 PM on February 23, 2003


there are real people in baghdad not just crazy guys with moustaches and rifles. should we bomb them anyway?
posted by specialk420 at 12:57 PM on February 23, 2003


I'm glad war ended communism, Tubes. That communism was really grating on me!!

Somehow I doubt you'd be so flip if your family had lived under a brutal Communist dictatorship as mine did, and had several of those extended family member and friends killed--let's not forget, the progenitors of Marxism intended for it spread around the globe. Would you be so flip if it spread to your neck of the woods, jonson?
posted by Karl at 1:00 PM on February 23, 2003


This is great. MidasMulligan says that Conservatives do make witty one-liners, then lists as examples the most boring an predictable slogans in the entire thread. Contradicting him, Tubes says that Conservatives do not in fact deign to write anything as banal as protest signs, then procedes to post pictures of some.

Nota bene: Two people can give opposite answers to a binary question and both be wrong.
posted by Hildago at 1:03 PM on February 23, 2003


Welcome to the new GrouchyMedia.com, the place to find those pump-you-up-to-kill-the-bad-guys videos everyone has been talking about.

[Dre] Don't pull the thang out, unless you plan to bang
[Choir] Bombs over Baghdad!
[Dre] Yeah! Ha ha yeah!
Don't even bang unless you plan to hit something
[Choir] Bombs over Baghdad!
[Dre] Yeah! Uhh-huh

Man, you put anything to Outkast and I'm all for it. That "Bomb Saddam" video could have been about sniffing glue and I would have been out going O.D. Elmer's Stylez. I'm that easy to manipulate folks! Modify your signs to reflect modern hip hop lyrics! NO WAR FOR BLING BLING!
posted by Stan Chin at 1:06 PM on February 23, 2003


Wulfgar!, probably one reason hawks don't do much sloganeering is because someone will immediately come along and say they think "war is good." As opposed to "necessary," "unavoidable," "better than the alternative." That point is, of course, debateable.

Also, there's an important distinction to be made between people who think that a proclamation ended slavery, and people who think that a war did. But in the event it took both: you can look it up.
posted by coelecanth at 1:08 PM on February 23, 2003


Jonson, you do realize that the two of the greatest tragedies of the 20th century (Stalin's Purge of 20 million and China's Cultural Revolution) were the result of communism. If we're talking about civilian deaths, Stalin alone killed more people than Hitler, War Japan and every US action in the 20th century.

But, hey, it wasn't really grating on *me*, right? Those communists didn't kill *my* mother. Must not have been a problem.

My problem with the protests about Iraq is not that they are protesting - I think protests can provide a decent counterargument that makes governments reconsider severe actions. The problem is that the peace protestors only seem to come out when the US or Israel is involved. Were there protestors against Libya when they blew up a plane of Lockerbie? No. How many millions were in the street when Pol Pot was killing millions? I don't remember many. How many protestors protested at the Rwandan embassy in the mid-90's? How many protested against India and Pakistan when they almost went to war? Not many - in fact, it was the "evil multinationals" who talked to Vajyapee and got him to tone down the rhetoric and diffuse the near nuclear-war last year.

How many clever slogans did you hear in the 70's and 80's when North Korea was seriously threatening to reinvade S. Korea (going so far as to build tunnels beneath the DMZ in 74)? How many clever slogans did you hear at the Congan embassy during the brutal civil war? How many protested against inaction when Milosevic was slaughtering Muslim Bosnians? Were there worldwide protests when Iraq gassed thousands of Kurds in 98? I must have missed them.

If these protestors were serious about peace, they would perform their function as mediators whenever innocents were being murdered, not just when Chomsky decides he wants to bash the West.

On Preview: Wulfgar: War most definitely ended slavery in the US. The South, because of their agricultural base, would never have given up slavery voluntarily like the North did. I know that the Civil War wasn't only because of slavery, but South Carolina did secede because of worries that Lincoln would restrict slavery (and thus impede of what SC thought was a state's right).
posted by Kevs at 1:08 PM on February 23, 2003


Karl, you might want to put aside that personal anger of yours long enough to realize that what jonson was saying wasn't that Communism was okay, but that war didn't bring about it's fall. To any who think it did, I refer you to The Bay of Pigs debacle, The Korean War, and the Vietnam War. Kindly reciprocate by informing me what battle led to the removal of the Berlin wall.
posted by Wulfgar! at 1:09 PM on February 23, 2003


Not sure where I saw this one - but it's stuck with me: "Blood is a renewable resource."
posted by wfrgms at 1:16 PM on February 23, 2003


Also, there's an important distinction to be made between people who think that a proclamation ended slavery, and people who think that a war did. But in the event it took both: you can look it up.

And what would that distinction be? Gee, having spent over a year studying the American Civil War, I wonder if I have any books around here to "look it up" in?

Kevs, I agree with your argument, but you miss two points: It can be argued that war put an end to slavery in The US because The Union was victorious, and hence was able to dictate adherence to law to the conquered confederacy. 1) That still doesn't prove war's efficacy for solving moral problems. It took law to end slavery, and a war to unify the nation under that law. 2) What wars ended slavery in other parts of the world? Viewing history only through the filter of the US history does NOT make a moral argument that war is necessary. And in fact, that view can be self-defeating.
posted by Wulfgar! at 1:20 PM on February 23, 2003


Ah, the imaginary world of the right winger. Where they stood against slavery and nazis. Where Ronald Reagan looked Gorbachev straight in the blotch and got the Berlin Wall taken down. Where Rocky IV inspired the Soviets to put down their hammers and sickels and embrace Kentucky Fried Chicken.

In the 1840s, 50s, and 60s, conservatives were opposed to the civil war.

In the 1930s, conservatives opposed America's entry into World War II.

Conservativism has opposed women's rights, civil rights, and gay rights, to name a few. Conservative administrations aided and abetted Osama Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein.

What mistake are you making now, that you'll disavow 20 years from now?
posted by condour75 at 1:21 PM on February 23, 2003


"The anti-war movement has all the best slogans"

I just can't get past that line without recalling Tom Lehrer:

Remember the war against Franco,
That's the kind where each of us belongs,
Though he may have won all the battles,
We had all the good songs.
posted by Zonker at 1:25 PM on February 23, 2003


Why do conservatives feel the need to post full jpegs of signs and cartoons dealing with protests? -raysmj

They're both links to images on other servers and take up no more MeFi server space than a text link. I thought twice about it, but I see it done occasionally here and haven't witnessed any spankings over doing so. Perhaps a topic for MetaTalk.

Tubes says that Conservatives do not in fact deign to write anything as banal as protest signs, then procedes to post pictures of some. - Hidalgo

Actually, I said "Conservatives aren't generally out in force developing humorous slogans" but that they do "sometimes fight fire with fire."
posted by Tubes at 1:40 PM on February 23, 2003


"Whoa, Cowboy!"

"We saved the French from catastrophe in WWII, Now they are trying to do the same for us"

and the best...
"Brazilian Bikini Waxers Against Bush"
posted by Sr_Cluba at 1:48 PM on February 23, 2003


Actually, I said "Conservatives aren't generally out in force developing humorous slogans" but that they do "sometimes fight fire with fire."

And given the fact that about 10 million people protested the war, and that the majority of the world population of 6 billion opposes it, it stands to reason that the same goes for doves.
posted by condour75 at 1:50 PM on February 23, 2003


The Soviet Communists and the fascists of the '30s would not have found their way to power if not for war. For more information, look into the history of World War I. The spread of Communism got a huge boost from World War II. War always has unintended consequences, and anyone who denies that is delusional (even if, yes, World War II was a "just" war for the allies to fight).

Fascism continued under Franco, by the way, with U.S. backing during the Cold War. It was a different sort of fascism, but still fascism.
posted by raysmj at 1:59 PM on February 23, 2003


sir walsingham: enough anti-war essays, already. Please.

zonker: aw yeah! Tom Lehrer is once again saving my sanity (what's left of it).
posted by swerve at 2:08 PM on February 23, 2003


Kevs: You missed the protests against North Korea, Democratic Republic of Congo, and Iraq. (Just three of your examples.)

Just because you don't see the protests on Fox News doesn't mean they aren't happening.
posted by ?! at 2:11 PM on February 23, 2003


The best ironic anti-war slogan (in MYHOP ) :

"Kick his ass and get the gas!"
posted by troutfishing at 2:11 PM on February 23, 2003


Kevs -- the reason protesters weren't out in force against the Khemer Rouge (for example) is that foreign fascist regimes don't care whether people protest in democratic nations. Democratic governments, on the other hand, do care (or should).
posted by Tlogmer at 2:16 PM on February 23, 2003


Uh, what ?! said.
posted by Tlogmer at 2:17 PM on February 23, 2003


?!: While we appreciate the hard work that Amnesty International does, their reports are not exactly mass protest marches through the streets of the world's nations capital.

And if there was a mass protest against Iraq or N. Korea, I could virtually guarantee you that Fox News would give it a crapload of coverage.
posted by PenDevil at 2:20 PM on February 23, 2003


?!, I'm a member of Amnesty, so I do understand that there are *some* people who protest against these atrocities. How many? Very, very few.

Aside from East Timor and Tibetan Human Rights, I can't think of any genocide in recent history, not involving the US in some way, that has sparked worldwide street protests.

On the other hand, every US action overseas has sparked these protests.

Tlogmer might be on to something that democratic governments care more about opinion than non-democratic govts. However, as East Timor, for instance, showed, action in democratic nations can sometimes incite that nation's govt. to put diplomatic pressure on a foreign nation. The extent of global interconnection means that protests in the US about US direct action and protests in the US about US diplomatic pressure should be equally effective.

I didn't protest against Bush. I'd say I'm pro-War (though my reasons are humanitarian, and I can't say with 100% certainty that Bush and Blair want to fight for that exact reason, though it is plausible).

If anyone wants to come out and protest in DC at the embassy of any real murderous regimes, though, I'd be glad to join you.
posted by Kevs at 2:28 PM on February 23, 2003


swerve: I know just what you mean. If it wasn't for Tom Lehrer, they'd have hauled me away years ago.

If you feel dissatisfaction,
Strum your frustrations away,
Some people may prefer action, but
Gimme a folk song, any ol' day.
posted by Zonker at 2:34 PM on February 23, 2003


there are real people in baghdad not just crazy guys with moustaches and rifles. should we bomb them anyway?

Have no fear, Bugsplat is here.
posted by homunculus at 2:47 PM on February 23, 2003


The best ironic anti-war slogan (in MYHOP ) :

"Kick his ass and get the gas!"


Um, I don't think that is meant to be ironic, or anti-war...
posted by Orange Goblin at 2:55 PM on February 23, 2003


whats the difference between protest slogans and an aramada of ditto heads, talk radio hosts, spin doctors, etc saying everyone who opposes the war is a pinko/commie/liberal/wuss/anti-american etc? and which side has the higher ground? (my money is on the ones with the signs.)

and now some midas food:

"Everything is Fine. Buy Duct Tape!" "Vote Republican. It's easier than thinking." "Listen To Rove/Bush/Rumsfield. It's easier than thinking." "Annoy a Conservative. Read." "Black people talk weird! Hoch Ptew Ding." "Conservative: Only listen to and respect the views of "open-minded" people who think like they do."

lotta good that did, huh?
posted by mcsweetie at 3:16 PM on February 23, 2003


and which side has the higher ground?

Neither, of course. But if you're placing your money with the ones with the signs, don't be upset when you end up broke.
posted by Karl at 3:22 PM on February 23, 2003


If by end up broke, you mean the country then it certainly looks that way, doubly so if this stupid war happens..
posted by Space Coyote at 3:30 PM on February 23, 2003


Uhhh Karl, which one's with signs?
posted by Wulfgar! at 3:41 PM on February 23, 2003


Any/All of them.

Sorry, I'm just as equally disgusted by Limbaugh dittoheads as I am by Bizarro-World-dittohead-style-protesters. Each group are of equal blame for making cooler headed moderates seem irrelevant these days.

Sadly,
K
posted by Karl at 3:48 PM on February 23, 2003


A couple of signs I read about:

Bombing is murder, abortion is surgical

Send Jenna
posted by Holden at 3:58 PM on February 23, 2003


No Justice.
No Peace.

Funny I never hear that oft-used liberal chant at the anti-war rallies.
posted by HTuttle at 4:49 PM on February 23, 2003


send jenna

awesome. my next poster.
posted by specialk420 at 4:56 PM on February 23, 2003


Mick, I've seen some anti-Israel sentiment in the anti-war protests. But I find it a huge stretch to call: "The last person to listen to a bush wandered in the desert for forty years" anti-semitic, just because it riffs on a Bible story.
posted by gametone at 5:38 PM on February 23, 2003


Kevs: Well, there is an interesting point there although I'm reluctant to endorse the fallacy that a failure to engage in visible mass protests equates to apathy. I have written scores of letters regarding the free ride given to China in regards to their internal oppression and saber-ratting in Taiwan. Liberals in general were expressing dismay and protest at the Taliban long before 9/11 while conservatives were hailing Islamism as an example of the benefits of religious government. Protests at embassies (lacking here in small-town midwest) have been so long-standing that they have not been considered to be very newsworthy.

There is a basic fallacy here that anti-war protests stem from any kind of love for Saddam Hussein. Those who complain that the anti-war movement has not offered up much in the way of alternatives have not been reading that much. (And it is my experience that pro-war advocates are simply not interested in engaging in debate anyway.)
posted by KirkJobSluder at 6:06 PM on February 23, 2003


Orange Goblin (re:" The best ironic anti-war slogan (in MYHOP ) : "Kick his ass and get the gas!" - Um, I don't think that is meant to be ironic, or anti-war...")

A little black humour there on my account......California Republican bumper stickers advertising the underlying motivation for a US invasion of Iraq and confirming the world's sense both of arrogant US attitudes and of a US hell-bent on world domination.

Makes me want to buy a megaphone...."Kick his ass and get the gas!"
posted by troutfishing at 7:11 PM on February 23, 2003


Kevs: Tlogmer did hit a strong point and KirkJobSluder's points in response were also on target. I'd join you in DC if it was possible. In my position I think I can accomplish more working through Amnesty.

Why do the actions of the US spark more protests? The US governmental organization and US corporations probably touch almost every country on Earth. The US is the hegemon. It only makes sense that the US global engagement will create people worldwide who are against those organizations and companies.

As for protests against North Korea, etc: Did the American conservatives protest? Did Le Canal Nouvelles, CTV, ABC, NBC, CBS, and TF1 all fail to show those protests?
posted by ?! at 7:19 PM on February 23, 2003


"Bush is not Hitler. After all, Hitler was lawfully elected"
"Smart bombs, stupid leaders."
"Yes war for oil - bomb USA."
posted by spazzm at 7:29 PM on February 23, 2003


And I must say that I'm fascinated by how every political debate always turns into small-minded republican/democrat or conservative/liberal bickering.
posted by spazzm at 7:32 PM on February 23, 2003


My favorite, btw:
"Draft the Bush twins."
posted by spazzm at 7:33 PM on February 23, 2003


This nation is about to embark upon the first test of a revolutionary doctrine applied in an extraordinary way at an unfortunate time. The doctrine of preemption -- the idea that the United States or any other nation can legitimately attack a nation that is not imminently threatening but may be threatening in the future -- is a radical new twist on the traditional idea of self defense. It appears to be in contravention of international law and the U.N. Charter. And it is being tested at a time of world-wide terrorism, making many countries around the globe wonder if they will soon be on our -- or some other nation's -- hit list.

Go ahead. Send me a new generation of recruits.
Your bombs will fuel their hatred of America
and their desire for revenge. Americans
and their allies won't be safe anywhere.
Please, attack Iraq. Distract yourself from
fighting Al Qaeda. Divide the international
community. Go ahead. Destabilise the region.
Destabilise Indonesia. Maybe Pakistan will fall
- we want its nuclear weapons.
Give Saddam a reason to strike first.
He might draw Israel into a fight. Perfect!
So please - invade Iraq. Make my day.

posted by y2karl at 7:42 PM on February 23, 2003


y2karl - My hat's off to you, good sir.
posted by troutfishing at 8:12 PM on February 23, 2003


y2karl tellin it like it is. an excellent editorial on iraq from jamaica [via rc3]
posted by specialk420 at 8:40 PM on February 23, 2003


Neither, of course.

I don't think the protestors get advertising revenue, or any kind of revenue for that matter.
posted by mcsweetie at 9:34 PM on February 23, 2003


Rumsfeld sent a letter to Saddam after the US attack on that country in 1991 that the US would not tolerate the use of chemical and biological weapons "or else you and your country will pay a terrible price".

From the Jamaican editorial. The writer has his defense secretaries confused, right?
posted by gsteff at 9:41 PM on February 23, 2003


I have always thought the GE logo is absolutely gorgeous

Apropros of nothing, internally GE refers to its logo as "the meatball." (On further investigation, "meatball" seems to be a common industry term for any round logo, but GE's is probably the best known of these.)
posted by kindall at 10:10 PM on February 23, 2003


"...the majority of the world population of 6 billion opposes [removing Saddam by force.]" - condour75

What survey resulted in that figure?
posted by Tubes at 10:19 PM on February 23, 2003


From London - "Stop Mad Cowboy Disease."
posted by chino at 10:35 PM on February 23, 2003


The hand that signed the paper felled a city;
Five sovereign fingers taxed the breath,
Doubled the globe of dead and halved a country;
These five kings did a king to death.

The mighty hand leads to a sloping shoulder,
The finger joints are cramped with chalk;
A goose's quill has put an end to murder
That put an end to talk.

The hand that signed the treaty bred a fever,
And famine grew, and locusts came;
Great is the hand the holds dominion over
Man by a scribbled name.

The five kings count the dead but do not soften
The crusted wound nor pat the brow;
A hand rules pity as a hand rules heaven;
Hands have no tears to flow.

                                            Dylan Thomas

posted by y2karl at 12:25 AM on February 24, 2003


I like 'make tea, not war' because it takes the piss out of 'make love, not war' - one of the most annoying slogans ever. In fact any banner which suggests the carrier is superior to the warmongers simply because they have a full and active sex life makes me want to heave.
posted by Summer at 2:31 AM on February 24, 2003


Dylan Thomas makes me want to heave.
posted by Karl at 5:46 AM on February 24, 2003


From the protest in Madrid: "Bush: if you want Oil, you can get it in Galicia for free"
posted by papalotl at 6:35 AM on February 24, 2003


Orange Goblin (re:" The best ironic anti-war slogan (in MYHOP ) : "Kick his ass and get the gas!" - Um, I don't think that is meant to be ironic, or anti-war...")

A little black humour there on my account......California Republican bumper stickers advertising the underlying motivation for a US invasion of Iraq and confirming the world's sense both of arrogant US attitudes and of a US hell-bent on world domination.

Makes me want to buy a megaphone...."Kick his ass and get the gas!"


Would you mind showing a legitimate reporting of this bumpersticker? Something besides the rantings of Chomsky and his buddies?
posted by Plunge at 7:12 AM on February 24, 2003


Are you safer now than you were a year ago? If public safety were a function of dollars spent and promises made, the answer would have to be a resounding yes, right?
posted by y2karl at 8:41 AM on February 24, 2003



posted by Karl at 9:17 AM on February 24, 2003


What Plunge said.

Troutfishing you've trotted out that saying several times on MeFi, people have called you on it and you haven't produced any documentation that it actually exists.
posted by turbodog at 9:56 AM on February 24, 2003


Sorry, don't have an image to post (actually, I do, but it's not handy right now). For a cartoon last week about the protests, I made a sign that I haven't seen yet... has someone else done it?

PLEASE DON'T FEED THE TERRORISTS
posted by soyjoy at 9:59 AM on February 24, 2003


Plunge, Turbodog - I did some checking around. It seems to have stemmed from a Chomsky interview, so I could have vbeen perpetuating a lie - BUT.....I did find this intriguing Rueters story:

"9-27-01

Paratroopers' Website Taken Out of Action

ROME, Sept 26 (Reuters) - A gung-ho Web site for U.S. paratroopers, which included a game called "Bash bin Laden," was partly closed down Wednesday after some of its features were criticized as insensitive. Sections of the Web site for the Italy-based 173rd Airborne Brigade, which included a map of the Middle East with countries renamed after U.S. oil companies, were made inaccessible and a message was posted in the middle of the homepage:
"Attention: Some pages on this site are undergoing redesign and will be posted again shortly. Please check back often. We undertake this effort to ensure the safety of our fellow soldiers and brothers." It was not immediately clear why the content had been closed down and no-one was available for comment at the 173rd Airborne Brigade headquarters in Vicenza, Italy..... Earlier the Web site (www.173rdairborne.com), which was set up before the September 11 attacks, offered visitors the chance to play "Bash bin Laden," a game involving hunting down and killing the exiled Saudi-born millionaire thought to be hiding in Afghanistan. The material had raised eyebrows in the 173rd's host country, with newspapers printing the aggressive content. Rome's La Repubblica published a story under the headline "U.S. Paras New Game -- 'Hit and conquer Osama.'".....Earlier, under the banner "Future map of the Middle East" and "Kick their ass and take their gas," the Web site had renamed Afghanistan "Texaco," Iraq "Chevron" and Pakistan "Exxon." Iran is referred to as "New Texas."  Another map on the site called Afghanistan "Lake America," and there was a picture of bin Laden with the caption: "I'm about to get my ass nuked off the face of the planet."  The 173rd Airborne has been headquartered in Vicenza since it was reactivated in June 2000. It was originally founded in 1917 and saw service in Vietnam.  Pictures also showed an American eagle sharpening its claws and eating bin Laden, the Statue of Liberty making an offensive gesture and American civil aviation planes dropping bombs with the caption "Non-stop flights to Afghanistan."  Visitors, including many veterans of the 173rd had left messages urging the paratroopers to "Let loose the dogs of war" and "Send those bastards all the way to hell." "


BEFORE Sept. 11th, you say? - strange indeed. I'll post more as I dig it up. My guess is that Chomsky garbled the slogan a bit. I found this under "Kick THEIR ass and Take THEIR gas". I'm trying other variations now, such as "Nuke their ass..."
posted by troutfishing at 10:11 AM on February 24, 2003


21
Perspective
Copyright of John Fairfax Group Pty Ltd

Nick HORDERN

Since September 11, world dependence on Gulf oil has become a matter of anxiety. The Caspian Basin has huge reserves but the geopolitics may prove as fraught as the Gulf's.

"Kick their ass and take their Gas,'' urged the website of the US Army's 173rd Airborne Brigade in the wake of September 11, showing a map with Afghanistan renamed "Texaco'', Iraq "Chevron'', Pakistan "Exxon'' and Iran "New Texas''.

The paratroopers' choice of energy security as America's chief goal in the region was spot on, but the civilians toned it down a bit.

"It is with pride that I say that the United States will not be deterred from its policy of seeking to develop Caspian energy,'' said US Ambassador Steve Mann, special adviser to Colin Powell on Caspian Energy Diplomacy, at a recent oil industry conference in Ashgabat, the capital of Turkmenistan.
posted by troutfishing at 10:29 AM on February 24, 2003


BINGO - Here you go, kind sirs. The original slogan was, in fact, "NUKE THEIR ASS AND TAKE THEIR GAS"

Or the bland "Send the Marines for Oil Now!"

Or Nuke 'em and seize the assets

Here's another sighting

Here's a mother, with young children, describing her emotional reaction to one of these bumper stickers in a letter to the Star-Tribune

Here's some more testimony: "I'm stopped at a red light behind a late-model Chevrolet SUV......I'm transfixed by the rear window on which are two stickers: one, an American flag, die-cut to look as though it is waving in an imaginary breeze. Under the flag are the words ''Proud to be an American.''...The second sticker provides a contextual reference point that makes the particular brand of patriotism espoused by this individual abundantly clear: ''Nuke Their Ass and Take the Gas.''

Indeed, the "Nuke their ass and take their gas" slogan popped up on discussion boards almost immediately after Sept. 11. Either the folks discussing this were unaware that Afganistan has very little oil or gas or they were lumping, in their minds, all Islamic countries together as some sort of "Towel-headistan" region which should just be nuked to a flat sheet of vitrified glass. This would be rather like Russia nuking all of North and South America in the case that a Tim McVeigh-like charactor were to bomb Moscow.

What's sad about all of this is the fact that the rest of the world is - though the internet - probably more aware of these grotesque US sentiments than are most Americans. Why shouldn't they view this as a form of dangerous national insanity? We've got the weapons, and we talk constantly of using them to obliterate whole nations.
posted by troutfishing at 11:02 AM on February 24, 2003


Nice try troutfishing. So now it isn't a bumpersticker from a Republican campaign, but it is from the website of the US Army's 173rd Airborne Brigade. Can you make up your mind where it is from?

Finally, can you find an actual, linkable news article about this? Not some opinion piece which, once again, gives a suspect reference.
posted by Plunge at 11:03 AM on February 24, 2003


Nice try troutfishing! Now, after you give them what they ask for, you better add a little tart and a bit of honey. Not to mention an autographed picture of George Bush French-kissing Tony Blair in the Rose Garden while Marines dance about in tutus.

And not Desmond's either.
posted by ?! at 11:23 AM on February 24, 2003



posted by y2karl at 11:53 AM on February 24, 2003


?!: No, the problem is he claimed it was from a Republican campaign. Then he claims it is from an Airbourne brigade. Now, he finds some guy who is selling them online, probably after hearing about it on the internet, and claims what? Is this the source of it now? Some numnut on the internet selling it? Someone's stupid comment on website or newgroup?

Just a WEEEEEE bit different than saying it is from a politicians campaign. If you want to go spouting the stupid slogan around, fine. Just give credit where credit is due, some idiot on the net.
posted by Plunge at 11:55 AM on February 24, 2003


Plunge - that's YOUR point, not mine. Initially, I just made a statement but you're helping me to refine it into a point. Thank you.

First of all, I said "California Republican bumper sticker" - you added the word "campaign" - But if you don't believe that the two links I posted, to bumper stickers for sale on the net, amount to anything, can I send you a "Nuke their ass and take the gas" sweat shirt?

The bumper stickers were bad enough. But, as the UK Observer notes "The Kick ass, get gas" slogan was, in fact, used during the LAST Gulf War (UK Observer) To be fair, the Washinton Times, post 9-11, only called for tactical nuclear strikes on Afghanistan, whereas a common sentiment, - both on the part of some members of the US 173rd and also of a number of the US civilian population - has been that the US should nuke most of the Mid-East, usually depicted as some sort of amorphous "Rag-headistan", into a sheet of vitrified glass. What a shame that people live there but, as some of the 173rd boys opined, "Kill 'em all and let God sort them out".

I didn't just "claim" the 173rd posted that on it's website. I posted the Google cache. I guess you didn't bother to read it? And the story was reported on - by Reuters, in Italian papers and indeed across the world: australia :""Kick their ass and take their Gas,'' urged the website of the US Army's 173rd Airborne Brigade in the wake of September 11, showing a map with Afghanistan renamed "Texaco'', Iraq "Chevron'', Pakistan "Exxon'' and Iran "New Texas''. " India: "outrage at the contemptible attack on its own soil led to cries which ranged from converting Afghanistan into “a parking lot”, to “kick their ass and take their gas” where West Asia is concerned. The Washington Times even called for the use of nuclear weapons against Afghanistan and Iraq!"

Here are some quotes from the 173rd site: "Kill all the Rag heads and then let God sort them out. God bless the men who serve our great country"...."Thanks so much to everyone for their service to the greatest country in the world. Kick some ass and take their gas! Gob bless the 173rd!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bless you guys for all you do. Go get 'em in the months ahead. I proudly hope to vacation in New Texas some day! God Bless America- A New Yorker
------------------------------------------------------
Oh please no war, no violence, they didn’t mean it they wont do it again, we can talk about it and all get along. BULL SHITT!! BULL SHITT!! BULL SHITT!!  These squeaky wheel pressure groups should be dropped off in Afghanistan, then nuke the bastards and turn it into one big parking lot."

MY point is that these sentiments are read - and appreciated for what they are - by people around the world. Given these widely expressed US sentiments, why shouldn't the rest of the world regard America as dangerously insane?

What other peoples - other than from the ranks of Al-Qaeda on other such terrorist groups - talk about mass destruction in this way?
posted by troutfishing at 12:58 PM on February 24, 2003


I made a shirt.
posted by brittney at 1:18 PM on February 24, 2003


interestingly, and perhaps a little ironically, Karl's image demonstrates how aloof and ignorant many in the pro-war crowd can be (although I suspect it's more of a willful thing than a genuine stupidity thing, but who knows?).

first of all: the blinders. who exactly is calling saddam a "freedom fighter?" it's putting words into people's mouths which is highly dishonest and highly deplorable given the fact that this is a war we're talking about. and if you wanna talk about murdering civilians...

Rumsfeld has also been encouraging a re-evaluation of the prohibition on targeting civilians, particularly with regard to actions directed at shattering support for the opponent regime.

secondly: the chanting. it's odd that such a statement would be coupled with the scarf and flag (if anyone can show me a picture of war protestor wearing palestine's flag, I'll send them $.25 via paypal) statements implying that war protestors simply hate isreal and america, which we've been hearing from right wing gasbags for months now. who's truly being irrational here? if you honestly think that protestors are on the ground out of a hate for isreal or america, then no offense but you're a complete tool. and who is arguing that isreal must be destroyed in order for there to be a palestinian state? and most importantly, what does this have to do with Iraq? you're deflecting the argument.

thirdly: the sign. I'll assume the "historical fact" is the one about war never solving anything. again, you're defelcting the argument. the point of contention is not that war never solves anything, just that it's not the best solution here.

and lastly: the earplugs. pointless emotional rhetoric. we must kill saddam to silence the wails of terrorism victims? give me a break.

I'm sure many would love for that cartoon to have been true, but it only shows who really has the blinders on.
posted by mcsweetie at 1:34 PM on February 24, 2003


my fave sign, from the rally-before-last in SF:

NO WAR IN IRAQ
GO GIANTS
posted by jcruelty at 2:39 PM on February 24, 2003


troutfishing the website you linked to is emphatically not the website of the 173d Airborne Brigade. As it says, right there on the page:

"This site is in no away affiliated with the 173d Airborne Bde in Vicenza, Italy or the Society of the 173d Airborne Bde."

The .com suffix should be a bit of a giveaway. US military websites end in .mil, the site you linked to is operated by a Vietnam-era veteran named who speaks for himself and not for the Army.

The unit's real site is here: http://www.173abnbde.setaf.army.mil/ Note the .mil suffix, and the lack of any content that even resembles what you've been going on about.
posted by Zonker at 3:56 PM on February 24, 2003


Sorry, that should have been a "Vietnam-era veteran named James R. Bradley" -- his personal site, at www.jamesrbradley.com explains a bit more about who he is (and isn't). (173rdairborne.com is registered to the same guy).
posted by Zonker at 4:03 PM on February 24, 2003


if anyone can show me a picture of war protestor wearing palestine's flag, I'll send them $.25 via paypal













posted by Karl at 4:03 PM on February 24, 2003


troutfishing:

This is what caused the problem:

Orange Goblin (re:" The best ironic anti-war slogan (in MYHOP ) : "Kick his ass and get the gas!" - Um, I don't think that is meant to be ironic, or anti-war...")

A little black humour there on my account......California Republican bumper stickers advertising the underlying motivation for a US invasion of Iraq and confirming the world's sense both of arrogant US attitudes and of a US hell-bent on world domination.


The first cache you posted, the one I commented about was from an opinion piece.

Then you post a chache of basically people sending notes that has that sentiment in it. huh? Not like that is an official position or anything now is it. Same with those articles. This isn't any official thing from the 173rd Airborne, it is some comments on a non-affiliated website!

Next, a post from the observer, one line, "'Kick his ass and get the gas,' the slogan of support for departing United States soldiers during the last Gulf War, is probably taking things too far."

Again, a "slogan of support" not saying who is actually saying those things. Heck, not even trying to cite a source. Another one of those "if we say it long enough it becomes the truth" type things I think.

Finally, your letter to the editor from the Chicago Sun Times (for a republican CA. sticker?). Sorry, but letters to the editor are worse than opinion pieces.

Personally, even though I rarely agree with your opinion, I've found many of your remarks and research to be quite thorough. But, the republican CA sticker has been brought up before and shot down before. What you have now shown is stuff from normal numnuts who inhabit this world. So, if you want to go on using that quote and citing a source, I certainly wouldn't say a "republican bumper sticker" or "From the 173rd Airborne." You'd be better off saying from some idiots on the web and leaving it at that.
posted by Plunge at 4:23 PM on February 24, 2003


Chickenhawk! Brawaaak! They love fightin' but they won't do it!
posted by y2karl at 4:56 PM on February 24, 2003


for the sake of being spikey, they aren't wearing the flag so no quarter for you! not that I have one to spare anyways, the economy is simply awful at the moment.
posted by mcsweetie at 5:46 PM on February 24, 2003


Zonker - Here is the Reuter's story on it (excerpted, more above) "ROME, Sept 26 (Reuters) - A gung-ho Web site for U.S. paratroopers, which included a game called "Bash bin Laden," was partly closed down Wednesday after some of its features were criticized as insensitive. Sections of the Web site for the Italy-based 173rd Airborne Brigade, which included a map of the Middle East with countries renamed after U.S. oil companies, were made inaccessible and a message was posted in the middle of the homepage:
"Attention: Some pages on this site are undergoing redesign and will be posted again shortly. Please check back often. We undertake this effort to ensure the safety of our fellow soldiers and brothers." It was not immediately clear why the content had been closed down and no-one was available for comment at the 173rd Airborne Brigade headquarters in Vicenza, Italy" You can read more about it Google search on term "Bash Bin Laden" or here on Fox

The Reuters story doesn't specify whether the site was the 173rd's official one. Apparently it was not: but it was heavily used by veterans (at least, if not active service members) of the 173rd who commented frequently on it, and was closely associated enough with the 173rd to be shut down after negative publicity - with an associated "no comment" treatment from 173rd's HQ (rather than a "they are in no way affiliated with the 173rd" disclaimer).

Plunge - I'd say that the UK Observer story made my case - better than any bumper sticker: The slogan "Kick their ass and take their gas" - or some permutation of it (like "Nuke their ass...", etc.) has been around since the last Gulf War.

I'd say it's a well established war cry. You are right on this: I should have not said "California Republican bumper stickers" but, rather, simply "bumper stickers". It seems to be a scattered national phenomenon, but those bumper sticker buyers could be Democrats, too.

Nuking the Mideast to a sheet of glass, or kicking "their" ass (whoever "they" are) isn't necessarily an exclusively Republican sentiment.

You keep suggesting that I called the slogan an official position of some sort. I didn't. ("Then you post a chache of basically people sending notes that has that sentiment in it. huh? Not like that is an official position or anything now is it.") -

As to whether I can "prove" that the bumper stickers shown for sale on the sites I linked to actually wind up on the bumpers vehicles........

What would constitute "proof" to you? Apparently not outraged letters to the editor from people claiming to have seen the stickers......sites where the bumper stickers are sold.....supporting evidence showing that the slogan in question has been around for at least a decade.....

What WOULD constitute evidence, by the standards you have implicitly set? I could take pictures and send them to you - but I could have bought the stickers myself, or even just manufactured a fake picture in Photoshop. I could buy a sweatshirt or bumper sticker and send it to you, though I doubt that would sway you either.

You suggest that stories by major media - and, apparently nothing else - would "prove" sightings of these stickers on vehicle bumpers.

This amounts to a claim that: if the major media don't cover a phenomenon, it does not exist. So, because the major media don't ever report on the fact that US presidents lie, they always tell the truth? Wrong - As Eric Alterman writes "Bush Lies, the Media Swallows", "...Roughly ten years ago, I celebrated the criminal indictment of Elliott Abrams for lying to Congress by writing an Op-Ed in the New York Times on the increasing acceptance of official deception. (I was just starting my dissertation on the topic back then.) The piece got bogged down, however, when an editor refused to allow me even to imply that then-President Bush was also lying to the country. I noted that such reticence made the entire exercise feel a bit absurd. He did not dispute this point but explained that Times policy simply would not allow it. I asked for a compromise. I was offered the following: "Either take it out and a million people will read you tomorrow, or leave it in and send it around to your friends." (It was a better line before e-mail.) Anyway, I took it out, but I think it was the last time I've appeared on that page."

There isn't much incentive for media to cover the "Kick his ass and get the gas"/"Nuke their ass..." story because it's highly controversial and divisive. I can continue digging up supporting material ad-nauseum. But what would be the point?

You're in danger of retreating into solipsism. Sure, there's a world out there, outside our heads. Can we prove it? It's damn hard. But it's out there nonetheless.
posted by troutfishing at 7:20 AM on February 25, 2003


britney - that is a very nice shirt.

i could help you out with that, yaknow...
posted by shadow45 at 9:19 AM on February 25, 2003


The Will of the World by Jonathan Schell
posted by y2karl at 10:57 AM on February 25, 2003


"The Reuters story doesn't specify whether the site was the 173rd's official one. Apparently it was not

There's no "apparently" about it, trout, the website is clearly not affiliated with the unit in any way; it is a private, personal site run by a Vietnam veteran. That should have been immediately obvious to the author of the Reuters story you quoted (and for that matter, to anyone who actually read the web page or looked at its URL). And why should the unit dignify this sort of nonsense with anything more than a "no comment"? Surely it's occurred to you that they have better things to do than teach Internet 101 to every reporter who hasn't bothered to do his own fact checking before calling up with a childish conspiracy theory. Or has it?
posted by Zonker at 3:35 PM on February 25, 2003


britney - that is a very nice shirt.


Yes it is. 'Definately needs wider exposure. Can American males fight a war with one hand?

(Doh!)
posted by Wulfgar! at 9:11 PM on February 25, 2003


Zonker - (re:"There's no "apparently" about it, trout, the website is clearly not affiliated with the unit in any way")

"I...did not have sex with...that woman!"

(Fox News) " 'Aggressive' Paratroopers 

A Web site for U.S. paratroopers based in Italy, which included a game called "Bash bin Laden," was partially closed down after some of its features were criticized as insensitive, reports Reuters. 

The site, set up for the 173rd Airborne, also included a map of the Middle East with some countries renamed for oil companies (Iran as "New Texas"), pictures of an American eagle sharpening its claws and an image of the Statue of Liberty making an offensive gesture....Late in the week, after some carping about the "aggressive content" by the Italian press and peace groups, a notice appeared on the site (www.173rdairborne.com), saying: "Some pages on this site are undergoing redesign and will be posted again shortly. Please check back often. We undertake this effort to ensure the safety of our fellow soldiers and brothers." "

Zonker, Zonker - You sound a little worked up. "The Reuters story doesn't specify whether the site was the 173rd's official one. Apparently it was not: but it was heavily used by veterans (at least, if not active service members) of the 173rd who commented frequently on it, and was closely associated enough with the 173rd to be shut down after negative publicity" - So, if it was a rogue site, why was it shut down? I'd say that the site in question was the "unofficial" official site for the 173rd. Except that they forgot the cardinal rule of the net - "everyone is watching".  
posted by troutfishing at 9:52 PM on February 25, 2003


« Older The Republic of Cascadia....  |  Did downsizing and inexperienc... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments