Seattle Central Community College Riot

[SpyKiller007]

US Army recruiters were "scared" when an estimated 300 to 500 Students Against the War visited their recruiting table at Seattle Central Community College on President Bush's Inauguration Day 01-20-2005/ They were chanting anti-war slogans when the recruiters became terrified of the unexpected crowd and ran for the protection of Campus Security officers. They went into protective custody and quickly left the campus. :(

This was a reflection of the Students for a Democratic Society's anti-military recruiting demonstrations nationwide during the Vietnam War.

At Portland State University in February 1970 the Students for a Democratic Society physically forced US Navy recruiters off that campus. Four students were kicked out of the college. Sixteen named students, including the four kicked out of the college, were issued restraining orders from Multnomah County Circuit Court. Twenty John and Jane Doe were also issued restraining orders even though the Sheriff had no one to give them to. Find out more at: http://www.livelogcity.com/users/copkiller11/434.html

One of the PSU students kicked out of school for the demonstration and a PSU professor were among those imprisoned for the 1973 dynamite bombings of Portland military recruiting stations. A 68-stick dynamite bomb belonging to them was later found in Seattle's Ballard district. The FBI claimed it was for use in the sabotage of a Ft. Lawton communications tower.

[RickSp]

Most of your post addresses events of over thirty years ago. Odd. The parallels are apt. The Middle East is our new Vietnam.

Addressing your initial paragraph, what can be said, but "it's about time."

[Mr.Vicchio]

Sick.

Those idiot yuppie or the unwashed naive class of people known as "anti-war" don't have a clue. They are protesting against recruiters... who get young men and women to join up to defend thier very right to "protest"

Gack, makes me sick.

[RickSp]

Quote by: Mr.Vicchio Sick. Those idiot yuppie or the unwashed naive class of people known as "anti-war" don't have a clue. They are protesting against recruiters... who get young men and women to join up to defend thier very right to "protest" Gack, makes me sick.

Right, getting killed in a immoral war on the other side of the war, yah that's fighting to defend our "rights". Sure. And up is down and truth is a lie. Speaking of not having a clue.

Sometimes patriotism begins by just saying "no." We fought another King George over 200 years ago. Time to start again.

[Mr.Vicchio]

Another King George..
Save the watches, the rhetorical nonsense is getting deep.

Immoral war... Yes 50 million people now able to decide thier own futures.. AS WE do is SOO immoral. I guess it would be more moral to let them suffer. Hey, we are talking moral here right?

[RickSp]

Quote by: Mr.Vicchio Another King George.. Save the watches, the rhetorical nonsense is getting deep. Immoral war... Yes 50 million people now able to decide thier own futures.. AS WE do is SOO immoral. I guess it would be more moral to let them suffer. Hey, we are talking moral here right?

You claim the right to invade countries who have never attacked us and kill and destroy at will. You obviously couldn't give a damn about the tens of thousands of men women and children we have killed or the tens of thousands of fine Americans killed or maimed. And the "liberated" Iraqis just want us to end our brutal invasion. Yours is the morality of a thug and and a bully. Wrapping that in a flag doesn't change a damn thing.

[Mr.Vicchio]

You claim the right to blissfully ignore the past.

Good going.

Iraq, in 1991 signed a ceasefire with the USA in which they were forced to DISARM openly, and willingly with the UN.

2003, they had failed in thier obligation. All your spin, all your big words and attempts to ignore that fact not withstanding...

The war, was legal, just and right.

[G. Adams]

They did disarm...

Not openly, but do we start wars with each other because they are embarrased for being beaten now?

[Mr.Vicchio]

Quote by: G. Adams They did disarm... Not openly, but do we start wars with each other because they are embarrased for being beaten now?

They did?

Funny way to prove you disarmed.. claim you have, show no proof, tell your neighboring countries you have them, and when faced with War or open proof you choose war...

Right.

BTW Can you prove that they did not ship thier WMD and equipment out of the country before the war?

Just curious.

[G. Adams]

Of course not, but if anyone could I'm sure it would be all over the papers by now.

[Mr.Vicchio]

There leaves three options on IRAQ WMD.

1. Saddam was deluded, and convinced his people were working on the programs and acted accordingly.

2. Iraq HAD WMD, and they are now buried well, or in Syria or Iran (rmember, they flew fighters to Iran before the first Gulf War)

3. Bush lied, we knew they didn't have them, Saddam was comming clean but the US strong armed the issue for oil.

I believe 1 and 2 are far closer to the truth.

[The Dunedan]

Mr. V,
Considering that the US edited over 8200/12000 pages from the UN Inspector's report before allowing the Security Council to see it and that it has been recently concluded by both UN and US inspectors that Saddam had no WMD, and has not had them for over a decade, I am inclined to lean towards #3.

[G. Adams]

If you had a large well armed neighbour next door to you, as Iraq did in the form of Iran (comparatively), that hates you, you would probably want to keep up the pretence of being well armed. It is also the condition of all dictators that they must maintain the facade of power, as they risk being overthrown by their populace or their own generals.

[Lou Minotti]

Quote by: Mr.Vicchio The war, was legal, just and right.

Complete and utter bunkem, my friend. Let me ask you...do you know what it means to live in a Constitutional Republic? Apparently not. Most necons don't. Iraqis have hardly been liberated. To suggest otherwise merely indicates those who have been hypnotized by Orwellian doublespeak. Let me ask another question. What do you think of having to submit to retina scans to enter your neighborhood? Is that freedom? "Liberation"? What about having to get permission from Halliburton to sell fruit on the street your grandparents' grandparents helped build? Freedom? Oh, woops, I mentioned Halliburton, I must worship Dennis Kucinich and have a commie flag on my wall (crony capitalism is good, right? I'm sure you'll have a great Newsmax article to back your assurtion).Yawn...Interesting though, all these necons lending to the "validity" of the UN or any so-called "UN resolution" in order to justify their little phony war.

Also, next time you talk to Dick Cheney...ask him for those satellite photos of Iraqi tanks massing on the Saudi border in '91...I'm sure they exist even though no one has ever seen them.

There leaves three options on IRAQ WMD. 1. Saddam was deluded, and convinced his people were working on the programs and acted accordingly. 2. Iraq HAD WMD, and they are now buried well, or in Syria or Iran (rmember, they flew fighters to Iran before the first Gulf War) 3. Bush lied, we knew they didn't have them, Saddam was comming clean but the US strong armed the issue for oil. I believe 1 and 2 are far closer to the truth.

I read Newsmax too. Only, I do it for the laughs...

[Milton Bradley]

Quote by: Mr.Vicchio Immoral war... Yes 50 million people now able to decide thier own futures.. AS WE do is SOO immoral. I guess it would be more moral to let them suffer. Hey, we are talking moral here right?

Thats is a funny analogy.


I'm an American, and I don't seem to able to decide my own future. I am not a free man by any stretch of the imagination.


So basically, you are just advocating that the same group of powermongers that rule over the US, should rule the rest of the planet.


That is wrong on so many levels.


Sovereign nations make their own laws.

[Lou Minotti]

Mr. Vicchio,

If you had given the slightest two sh%ts about anyone in Iraq, you would have grabbed a gun, headed over there yourself and helped them rise up against oppression (like Poppy's CIA promised). It's a free market. See you in Baghdad. Oh wait, I mean, whenever you are done playing video games that is ("gamer...big time")...

[RickSp]

Quote by: Mr.Vicchio There leaves three options on IRAQ WMD. 1. Saddam was deluded, and convinced his people were working on the programs and acted accordingly. 2. Iraq HAD WMD, and they are now buried well, or in Syria or Iran (rmember, they flew fighters to Iran before the first Gulf War) 3. Bush lied, we knew they didn't have them, Saddam was comming clean but the US strong armed the issue for oil. I believe 1 and 2 are far closer to the truth.

Still beating this dead horse? Ridiculous. There were WMD just as the inspectors said. There were some quibbles about accounting for destroyed stocks which did indeed turn out to have ben destroyed. The US found zero evidence that the WMD were moved before the war.

And even if Saddam had some WMD, as indeed he did when he was our ally in the 1980s, he was no threat to us. Nothing wrong with self defense, but this war was naked aggression.

[rcne]

Yale or is it Harvard decided to ban recruiters from recruiting on campus. In America that is the right of the trustees of the university to decide.

But it is not mandatory to receive federal research funds ( it may be used for national defense), or any other associated funding - if government recruiters are not allowed on campus.

This includes FBI, CIA any government agency or any military branch. Federal funds are not a right to closed schools.

Ban the government from campus if you care that much, but be fair and ban government funds also..

[Lou Minotti]

Federal funds are not a right to closed schools.

Federal funds (ie, money stolen from you and me) are not right. Period.

[Mr.Vicchio]

Ahhh, DU Lite syndrome strike again.

I love you guys, really I do. Start pointing out why we were right to go to war with Iraq, and it's like tuning into Air America.

The laughs never stop. You guys will never learn.