Ten Days That Shook Olympia

[archenemy]

There is something for everyone.

[JayB]

[JayB]

[prole]

Edited November 20, 2007 by prole

[prole]

Funny that the people in the photos that you depicted were probably ones that were better informed than you were and were actively opposed to the war from the beginning. Called bullshit on Colin Powell's UN powerpoint presentation, Saddam's nukes, realized the potential for destabilization of the Mideast and civil war in Iraq, etc, etc, etc. All this while you were blowing smoke up each others asses and trying to recruit others for your idiotic crusade and its entirely predictable outcome. Well, good luck trying to sell your kids these cheap chuckles when they realize what a dumb fuck you were and how their legacy has been diminished as a result.

[sk]

Funny that the people in the photos that you depicted were probably ones that were better informed than you were and were actively opposed to the war from the beginning. Called bullshit on Colin Powell's UN powerpoint presentation, Saddam's nukes, realized the potential for destabilization of the Mideast and civil war in Iraq, etc, etc, etc. All this while you were blowing smoke up each others asses and trying to recruit others for your idiotic crusade and its entirely predictable outcome. Well, good luck trying to sell your kids these cheap chuckles when they realize what a dumb fuck you were and how their legacy has been diminished as a result.

 

i hate to spoil the story, but we all die and the sun goes super nova.

[JayB]

Funny that the people in the photos that you depicted were probably ones that were better informed than you were and were actively opposed to the war from the beginning. Called bullshit on Colin Powell's UN powerpoint presentation, Saddam's nukes, realized the potential for destabilization of the Mideast and civil war in Iraq, etc, etc, etc. All this while you were blowing smoke up each others asses and trying to recruit others for your idiotic crusade and its entirely predictable outcome. Well, good luck trying to sell your kids these cheap chuckles when they realize what a dumb fuck you were and how their legacy has been diminished as a result.

 

 

Wait a second, I thought that the stability purchased at the expense of certain understandingswith less than savory regimes in the Middle East was the problem, comrade. Quite surprising to see an impassioned defense of these condorcats

emerging from such quarters.

 

 

 

 

[prole]

Funny that the people in the photos that you depicted were probably ones that were better informed than you were and were actively opposed to the war from the beginning. Called bullshit on Colin Powell's UN powerpoint presentation, Saddam's nukes, realized the potential for destabilization of the Mideast and civil war in Iraq, etc, etc, etc. All this while you were blowing smoke up each others asses and trying to recruit others for your idiotic crusade and its entirely predictable outcome. Well, good luck trying to sell your kids these cheap chuckles when they realize what a dumb fuck you were and how their legacy has been diminished as a result.

 

 

Wait a second, I thought that the stability purchased at the expense of certain understandingswith less than savory regimes in the Middle East was the problem, comrade. Quite surprising to see an impassioned defense of these condorcats

emerging from such quarters.

 

 

 

You call that a reply? You're a waste of skin and a waste of my time.

[JayB]

It was more of a question, but thanks for the compliments.

[Fairweather]

A "waste of skin"? WTF?

[KaskadskyjKozak]

A "waste of skin"? WTF?

 

i guess товариш Prole doesn't think Jay would make a good lampshade

 

[Fairweather]

 

...This private moment used without permission for political purposes by prole. User makes no claim as to what lies inside the hearts of these two newlyweds or as to the depth of the love they share.

[lizard_brain]

Funny that the people in the photos that you depicted were probably ones that were better informed than you were and were actively opposed to the war from the beginning. Called bullshit on Colin Powell's UN powerpoint presentation, Saddam's nukes, realized the potential for destabilization of the Mideast and civil war in Iraq, etc, etc, etc. All this while you were blowing smoke up each others asses and trying to recruit others for your idiotic crusade and its entirely predictable outcome. Well, good luck trying to sell your kids these cheap chuckles when they realize what a dumb fuck you were and how their legacy has been diminished as a result.

 

i hate to spoil the story, but we all die and the sun goes super nova.

 

Awwww... You ruined the end for me!

 

[prole]

 

...This private moment used without permission for political purposes by prole. User makes no claim as to what lies inside the hearts of these two newlyweds or as to the depth of the love they share.

 

 

This "private moment" won the World Press Photo Award last year. It and other photographs are part of a series centered around the return, rehabilitation, marriage, and reintegration of Ty Ziegel, the wounded vet. They have been published in dozens of magazines and websites. The entire series and others can be found here. You are correct that I make no claim to what lies in these peoples hearts, I posted the photo without a caption. Draw your own conclusion. Personally, and in the context of this "discussion", the photograph reminds me what is at stake when we struggle around the meaning of the war and its aftermath. Political? Yes. Disrespectful? You tell me. But when you do, don't forget your own transgressions:

 

When leftist prof's turn critical thinking into cynical thinking and irresponsibly plant the dark seeds of their own discontent in young minds.

 

 

Those goof balls down at the Port of Olympia seem pretty harmless, albeit misguided. I would be curious how many are Greeners - and who's stirring 'em up.

Edited November 20, 2007 by prole

[sk]

as far as i know there is no draft at this time. that means all military personal are voluntary. war sucks but the people there singed up to be there knowing that they may have to pay some kind of cost. don't belittle the gift that these folks have given to their country becuase you do not agree with the administration. it is noble to serve our country.

 

i think many since the 80's have lost sight of the idea of peaceful protest. i respect peoples freedom and right to have a say, to protest to disagree. preaching hate mongering is not the way to do it. we do not educate through violence and hate. we do not garner respect and the attention of people in power by making asses of ourselves.

[octopuswithafez]

 

I was a rebel from the day i left school

Grew my hair long and broke all the rules

I'd sit and listen to my records all day

With big ambitions of where i could play

 

My parents taught me what life was about

So i grew up the type they warned me about

They said my friends were just an unruly mob

And i should get a haircut and get a real job

 

Get a haircut and get a real job

Clean your act up and don't be a slob

Get it together like your big brother bob

Why don't you get a haircut and get a real job

 

I even tried that 9 to 5 scene

I told myself that it was all a bad dream

I found a band and some good songs to play

And now I party all night, I sleep all day

 

I met this chick she was my No.1 fan

She took me home to meet her mommy and dad

They took one look at me and said ("oh my god")

Get a haircut and get a real job

 

Get a real job, why don't you get a real job

Get a real job, why don't you get a real job

 

I hit the big time with my rock 'n' roll band

The future's brighter now than I'd ever planned

I'm ten times richer than my big brother bob

And he, he's got a haircut he's got a real job

 

Why don't you get a haircut and get a real job

[KaskadskyjKozak]

as far as i know there is no draft at this time. that means all military personal are voluntary. war sucks but the people there singed up to be there knowing that they may have to pay some kind of cost. don't belittle the gift that these folks have given to their country becuase you do not agree with the administration. it is noble to serve our country.

 

i think many since the 80's have lost sight of the idea of peaceful protest. i respect peoples freedom and right to have a say, to protest to disagree. preaching hate mongering is not the way to do it. we do not educate through violence and hate. we do not garner respect and the attention of people in power by making asses of ourselves.

 

Wow. Well said.

[prole]

 

i think many since the 80's have lost sight of the idea of peaceful protest. i respect peoples freedom and right to have a say, to protest to disagree. preaching hate mongering is not the way to do it. we do not educate through violence and hate. we do not garner respect and the attention of people in power by making asses of ourselves.

The fact that the Olympia protests were overwhelmingly peaceful (on the part of the protesters, at least) seems to be entirely lost on you. Does the time-honored American tradition of non-violent civil disobedience represent a hate-crime for you? If so, I suggest you contact your congressperson and suggest they draft up some legislation to that effect. I'm sure Bushco. would see the benefits.

[JayB]

 

i think many since the 80's have lost sight of the idea of peaceful protest. i respect peoples freedom and right to have a say, to protest to disagree. preaching hate mongering is not the way to do it. we do not educate through violence and hate. we do not garner respect and the attention of people in power by making asses of ourselves.

The fact that the Olympia protests were overwhelmingly peaceful (on the part of the protesters, at least) seems to be entirely lost on you. Does the time-honored American tradition of non-violent civil disobedience represent a hate-crime for you? If so, I suggest you contact your congressperson and suggest they draft up some legislation to that effect. I'm sure Bushco. would see the benefits.

 

They can protest peacefully on the side of the road. Once they physically block a public space and take it upon themselves to determine which uses are and are not permissible, and who can and cannot pass, they have overstepped their bounds and assumed rights that only properly belong to the legislature.

 

They've also entered into a realm where although they are not resorting to physical violence, they are using physical force in an attempt to impose their agenda, rather than the force of their arguments alone. Once you cross that bridge, you will and should be forcibly removed by the people that the freely elected legislature have authorized to do so in order to uphold these same laws.

 

"Those members of our community who attend or are employed at Evergreen and who participate in the port protests, do so as individual citizens, exercising their conscience on their own time.

 

That is their right. It is the right of all of us as members of a democratic society. The expression of political views through protest has a long history in our democracy and is widely understood as a fundamental civil right.

 

However, when those engaging in protest express their views by breaking the law either through peaceful civil disobedience, or, regrettably, by destroying property in the community or on campus, they should expect to be held accountable by our legal system with the attendant due process."

[sk]

 

i think many since the 80's have lost sight of the idea of peaceful protest. i respect peoples freedom and right to have a say, to protest to disagree. preaching hate mongering is not the way to do it. we do not educate through violence and hate. we do not garner respect and the attention of people in power by making asses of ourselves.

The fact that the Olympia protests were overwhelmingly peaceful (on the part of the protesters, at least) seems to be entirely lost on you. Does the time-honored American tradition of non-violent civil disobedience represent a hate-crime for you? If so, I suggest you contact your congressperson and suggest they draft up some legislation to that effect. I'm sure Bushco. would see the benefits.

 

They can protest peacefully on the side of the road. Once they physically block a public space and take it upon themselves to determine which uses are and are not permissible, and who can and cannot pass, they have overstepped their bounds and assumed rights that only properly belong to the legislature.

 

They've also entered into a realm where although they are not resorting to physical violence, they are using physical force in an attempt to impose their agenda, rather than the force of their arguments alone. Once you cross that bridge, you will and should be forcibly removed by the people that the freely elected legislature have authorized to do so in order to uphold these same laws.

 

"Those members of our community who attend or are employed at Evergreen and who participate in the port protests, do so as individual citizens, exercising their conscience on their own time.

 

That is their right. It is the right of all of us as members of a democratic society. The expression of political views through protest has a long history in our democracy and is widely understood as a fundamental civil right.

 

However, when those engaging in protest express their views by breaking the law either through peaceful civil disobedience, or, regrettably, by destroying property in the community or on campus, they should expect to be held accountable by our legal system with the attendant due process."

 

thank you JayB

 

I live in a city over run on several occasions by protest turned riot. i have been caught in the middle and seen people on all sides wounded, killed, and property destroyed by zealots from both sides. I no longer trust the far left any more than i ever trusted the right.

[prole]

 

i think many since the 80's have lost sight of the idea of peaceful protest. i respect peoples freedom and right to have a say, to protest to disagree. preaching hate mongering is not the way to do it. we do not educate through violence and hate. we do not garner respect and the attention of people in power by making asses of ourselves.

The fact that the Olympia protests were overwhelmingly peaceful (on the part of the protesters, at least) seems to be entirely lost on you. Does the time-honored American tradition of non-violent civil disobedience represent a hate-crime for you? If so, I suggest you contact your congressperson and suggest they draft up some legislation to that effect. I'm sure Bushco. would see the benefits.

 

They can protest peacefully on the side of the road. Once they physically block a public space and take it upon themselves to determine which uses are and are not permissible, and who can and cannot pass, they have overstepped their bounds and assumed rights that only properly belong to the legislature.

 

They've also entered into a realm where although they are not resorting to physical violence, they are using physical force in an attempt to impose their agenda, rather than the force of their arguments alone. Once you cross that bridge, you will and should be forcibly removed by the people that the freely elected legislature have authorized to do so in order to uphold these same laws.

 

"Those members of our community who attend or are employed at Evergreen and who participate in the port protests, do so as individual citizens, exercising their conscience on their own time.

 

That is their right. It is the right of all of us as members of a democratic society. The expression of political views through protest has a long history in our democracy and is widely understood as a fundamental civil right.

 

However, when those engaging in protest express their views by breaking the law either through peaceful civil disobedience, or, regrettably, by destroying property in the community or on campus, they should expect to be held accountable by our legal system with the attendant due process."

 

That these people are breaking the law and are subject to it is obvious to all, not least by those risking their liberty by engaging in civil disobedience. What is not so obvious is when and where such "extralegal" action is and has been an appropriate tactic. This cannot be determined by legalistic definition as civil disobedience is illegal according to existing laws by definition. Many famous examples in American history of such actions, while derided at the time, are now deemed to have been necessary and appropriate in the court of public opinion. Rosa Parks, lunch-counter sit-ins, Boston Tea Party, etc. Your point regarding access to representation, courts, etc. in liberal democracies is well taken, but I think that the actual substance of this access needs to be addressed in the age of "the decider" when overwhelming public opinion is dismissed as "focus-group politics".

[kevbone]

A "waste of skin"? WTF?

 

 

I second that.....WTF?

[Dechristo]

 

"Two guys who selflessly gave of themselves so that 500 could protest in Olympia."

 

No, not literally, you morons.

 

you forgot to add "ingrate".

[JayB]

 

i think many since the 80's have lost sight of the idea of peaceful protest. i respect peoples freedom and right to have a say, to protest to disagree. preaching hate mongering is not the way to do it. we do not educate through violence and hate. we do not garner respect and the attention of people in power by making asses of ourselves.

The fact that the Olympia protests were overwhelmingly peaceful (on the part of the protesters, at least) seems to be entirely lost on you. Does the time-honored American tradition of non-violent civil disobedience represent a hate-crime for you? If so, I suggest you contact your congressperson and suggest they draft up some legislation to that effect. I'm sure Bushco. would see the benefits.

 

They can protest peacefully on the side of the road. Once they physically block a public space and take it upon themselves to determine which uses are and are not permissible, and who can and cannot pass, they have overstepped their bounds and assumed rights that only properly belong to the legislature.

 

They've also entered into a realm where although they are not resorting to physical violence, they are using physical force in an attempt to impose their agenda, rather than the force of their arguments alone. Once you cross that bridge, you will and should be forcibly removed by the people that the freely elected legislature have authorized to do so in order to uphold these same laws.

 

"Those members of our community who attend or are employed at Evergreen and who participate in the port protests, do so as individual citizens, exercising their conscience on their own time.

 

That is their right. It is the right of all of us as members of a democratic society. The expression of political views through protest has a long history in our democracy and is widely understood as a fundamental civil right.

 

However, when those engaging in protest express their views by breaking the law either through peaceful civil disobedience, or, regrettably, by destroying property in the community or on campus, they should expect to be held accountable by our legal system with the attendant due process."

 

That these people are breaking the law and are subject to it is obvious to all, not least by those risking their liberty by engaging in civil disobedience. What is not so obvious is when and where such "extralegal" action is and has been an appropriate tactic. This cannot be determined by legalistic definition as civil disobedience is illegal according to existing laws by definition. Many famous examples in American history of such actions, while derided at the time, are now deemed to have been necessary and appropriate in the court of public opinion. Rosa Parks, lunch-counter sit-ins, Boston Tea Party, etc. Your point regarding access to representation, courts, etc. in liberal democracies is well taken, but I think that the actual substance of this access needs to be addressed in the age of "the decider" when overwhelming public opinion is dismissed as "focus-group politics".

 

I think that each group you refer to could make a strong case that their rights had been abridged in a fashion that *actually* left them without the same representation that other citizens enjoyed, and lacked the same opportunity to influence the laws that they were subject to.

 

Not one person in Olympia can make that case.

[prole]

Perhaps our differences on this issue stem from the fact that I am under no such illusion that in this day and age, in this time and place that we all have "the same opportunity to influence the laws that (we are) subject to." Legalistically, yes. Substantively, no.