BIKE! Against War

----- Original Message ----- From: "Jym Dyer" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

OUR GOALS:
* To give voice to popular opposition to war!
* To non-violently disrupt the normal functioning of the Downtown area!
* To provide mobile support to stationary direct actions planned throughout the city!

YOUR GOALS:
* To give aid and comfort to the enemy during time of war.
* To attempt to demoralize our troops during the most dangerous, stressful and difficult time of
their lives.
* To attempt to disrupt an already shaky economy during a time of crisis.

Dave

That pesky First Amendment just keeps getting in the way, doesn't it?

--

alan

Anyone who believes in a liberal media has never read the "Daily Oklahoman."

"Raoul Duke" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

YOUR GOALS:
* To give aid and comfort to the enemy during time of war.
* To attempt to demoralize our troops during the most dangerous, stressful and difficult time of
their lives.
* To attempt to disrupt an already shaky economy during a time of crisis.

Hmmm, I cant say I agree with your intent, but you do have the right to voice your opinion. I mean -
its not like this is Iraq or anything.

YOUR GOALS:
* To give voice to popular opposition to war! Have fun. You have every right to protest peacefully.
Good luck.

* To non-violently disrupt the normal functioning of the Downtown area! This is not so cool.
Basically since you dont agree with the situation you plan to be a pain in the butt to an entire
city. Thus infringing on the rights of the rest of the town while you revel in your own right to
protest. I think you may need to re-examine your motivation. Morally this idea seems a little
foggy to me.

* To provide mobile support to stationary direct actions planned throughout the city! See above.

In article said:

----- Original Message ----- From: "Jym Dyer" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

OUR GOALS:
* To give voice to popular opposition to war!
* To non-violently disrupt the normal functioning of the Downtown area!
* To provide mobile support to stationary direct actions planned throughout the city!

YOUR GOALS:
* To give aid and comfort to the enemy during time of war.
* To attempt to demoralize our troops during the most dangerous, stressful and difficult time of
their lives.
* To attempt to disrupt an already shaky economy during a time of crisis.

Dave

Actually, I think Jym's goals are to try to save the country from our emerging police state and have
a little fun in the process. The idea that either our troops or Saddam would hear squat about some
people riding bicycles around SF city streets (having little effect on congestion since everything
is already gridlocked) boggles the mind.

Some diplomacy, some "due diligence" by getting U.N. support, and other reasonable measures would
provide far more real support for our troops than you could ever get from a court-appointed
president, who seems to think John Wayne's acting provides some sort of role model as he goes off on
some half-baked adventure (with no risk to himself.)

Bill

--
As an anti-spam measure, my email address is only provided in a GIF file. Please see
<http://home.pacbell.net/zaumen/email.gif>.

"RattRigg" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Hmmm, I cant say I agree with your intent, but you do have the right to voice your opinion. I mean
- its not like this is Iraq or anything.

YOUR GOALS:
* To give voice to popular opposition to war! Have fun. You have every right to protest
peacefully. Good luck.

* To non-violently disrupt the normal functioning of the Downtown area! This is not so cool.
Basically since you dont agree with the situation you plan to be a pain in the butt to an entire
city. Thus infringing on the rights of the rest of the town while you revel in your own right to
protest. I think you may need to re-examine your motivation. Morally this idea seems a little
foggy to me.

I suppose killing innocent people under the pretext of helping them behind motives of controlling
the second largest oil reserves in the world is morally clear.

Quoted message said:

* To provide mobile support to stationary direct actions planned throughout the city! See above.

"Ken [NY)" <[email hidden]_text> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On 18 Mar 2003 07:46:07 -0800, Jym Dyer <[email hidden]> ejaculated:

Quoted message said:

NO TO WAR! NO BUSINESS AS USUAL!!!

kdp.pp.sechemical.htmlOpen ↗

Nice scary pictures. No one said Hussain isn't a big problem. But killing innocent people and
obliverating a country is not the answer. If you go and take pictures of what our bombs and
radioactive depleted uranium have done to Iraq and Afghanistan you'll get just as scary of pictures,
but more of them. If you take pictures of what we're about to do it's absolutely disgusting and on a
much larger scale. The death tolls for Innocent Iraqis from the Gulf war are now up to 1.2 million
(half of which are children). If the US wants to point a finger at Hussain remember there are three
pointing back at us.

Quoted message said:

Ken (NY) Chairman, Department Of Redundancy Department
____________________________________

A reminder: Why we are fighting: geocities.comAmericaAttacked.htmOpen ↗

The Trade towers have nothing to do with the Twinn Towers ands even if it did it would not justify
mass destruction as retaliation. You are demonstrating the same mindset as those you despise.

Quoted message said:

Another reason: kdp.pp.sechemical.htmlOpen ↗

email: geocities.comemail.htmOpen ↗

'All I really need to know about Islam, I learned on September 11.'

- Julian D.

Racism won't get you very far. Violence begets violence. The only way to end it, is to step out of
the circle.

In ba.bicycles Ken NY) _text said:

March 18, 2003, 9:00 a.m. Seeing Red Spontaneous anti-American demonstrations? Think again.

Quoted message said:

Over the March 15-16 weekend there were simultaneous anti-American and pro-peace demonstrations
around the world, with the largest in Athens and Moscow. It is significant that the headquarters
of the Soviet-created World Peace Council (WPC) is now in Athens, ...

Quoted message said:

In fact, the WPC Secretariat recently recognized that the WPC has "participated in or
co-organized" the current worldwide anti-American demonstrations.

So basically, some ridiculous outdated Cold War-era front organization that probably has three
staffers and a flyblown office with a Ditto machine is trying to piggyback by claiming credit for
organizing worldwide demonstrations, and the only people they're fooling are you and the author of
this article.

Followups to ba.bicycles.

one of the six billion said:

"Ken [NY)" <[email hidden]_text> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On 18 Mar 2003 07:46:07 -0800, Jym Dyer <[email hidden]> ejaculated:

Quoted message said:

NO TO WAR! NO BUSINESS AS USUAL!!!

kdp.pp.sechemical.htmlOpen ↗

Nice scary pictures. No one said Hussain isn't a big problem. But killing innocent people and
obliverating a country is not the answer. If you go and take pictures of what our bombs and
radioactive depleted uranium

Depleted uranium isn't particularly radioactive.

Doug

Ken,

Depleted uranium is the left-over from refining uranium with the naturally occurring mixture of
isotopes (only .72 percent of which is the fissionable 235U). The fissionable 235U is used for
reactors and explosives and the remaining 238U is just a metal. It's only mildly radioactive--it's
half-life is ten times that of 235U (it's an alpha emitter, so it's only a health problem if it gets
inside your body somehow).

DU is used for purposes where a very dense metal is desired.

From a chemical standpoint (irrespective of isotopic variation), Uranium has a strong oxygen
affinity: "Metallic uranium tarnishes in air and when finely divided ignites spontaneously."

Randy

Ken NY) said:

one of the six billion said:

and radioactive depleted uranium

Isn't that an oxymoron?

Ken

Quoted message said:

I suppose killing innocent people under the pretext of helping them behind motives of controlling
the second largest oil reserves in the world is morally clear.

Killing innocent people is not the goal of the military action in Iraq, just a sad consequence. And
Id say the fault lies with the Iraqi dictator who brought this on his people by his refusal to
comply with the UN resolutions.

Its sad that this fact has to be pointed out. If Saddam had complied at any time in the past 10 or
so years, he'd be sitting in his palace right now and the big bad USA couldnt touch him.

Instead he chose to put his own ego ahead of the welfare of his country.

On the other hand disrupting the city is the stated goal of your protest. You dont even try to
pretend that your goal is to make your point, or to get the story out. In fact, the war in Iraq is
simply being used as an excuse to act lke spoiled children.

I cant decide if your "protest" is meant to be punishment for the
vast majority of the people who live there and actually dare to be
supportive of the war, or if its just a collective temper tantrum.

"RattRigg" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I suppose killing innocent people under the pretext of helping them

behind

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

motives of controlling the second largest oil reserves in the world is morally clear.

Killing innocent people is not the goal of the military action in Iraq, just a sad consequence.

Quoted message said:

And Id say the fault lies with the Iraqi dictator who brought this on his people by his refusal to
comply with the UN resolutions.

Human Rights is not the goal of this ILLEGAL UNPROVOKED WAR. The US can't cause magnitudes greater
death and destruction than what Sadam has and call that concern for human rights. Protection of the
US is not the goal of this WAR either. Iraq does not represent a threat to the US. The Gulf war left
them with nothing, and the last 12 years of sanctions finished off any little bit that was left.
Besides, guess where any of the weapons in question (which of those that weren't destroyed in the
Gulf war are of little consequence anyway to the US's $340+ billion annual military expenditure).
The threat that the Bush administration keeps propagandizing is non-existent. Even if it were, it is
not only immoral but illegal to go to war unprovoked!

Quoted message said:

Its sad that this fact has to be pointed out.

What is sad is the amount of US citizens that have fallen for such preposterous propaganda. Even
sadder is the amount of people that have been conditioned into basically cheering on as
entertainment the death and destruction of innocent human lives for an agenda that is all about
money, oil and power.

Quoted message said:

If Saddam had complied at any time in the past 10 or so years, he'd be sitting in his palace right
now and the big bad USA couldnt touch him.

Instead he chose to put his own ego ahead of the welfare of his country.

The US has demonstrated time and time again they are not interested in human rights nor the safety
of its own people. Such concerns are only displayed when such issues can be used to gain support for
something in their own interests.

Quoted message said:

On the other hand disrupting the city is the stated goal of your protest. You dont even try to
pretend that your goal is to make your point, or to get the story out. In fact, the war in Iraq
is simply being used as an excuse to act lke spoiled children.

I have attended the past 4 very large legal, organized, peaceful marches. Each one had proper
permits (which cost between $50,000 and $85,000). The goal of those marches as stated and as
materialized was education, solidarity and a show of the will of the people that is protected by the
constitution. The media in each and every case failed to give it anywhere near the same light as the
literal lies they have been saturating the airwaves with for months.

You must be speaking about today's civil disobedience actions. They came only after the most
unspeakable travesty of justice to the people of the US and the world. Those behind the war have
made a shamble of not only human rights but of democracy and world diplomacy as well. The actions of
today are minor compared to what motivated them. They are also the precise actions advocated to
create peaceful change by some of the greatest people in history. The reality of today's events are
that unspeakable levels of violence and anger have been perpetrated by the police not by the people.
(of course mass media reports will portray the exact opposite).

Quoted message said:

I cant decide if your "protest" is meant to be punishment for the
vast majority of the people who live there and actually dare to be
supportive of the war, or if its just a collective temper tantrum.

It is currently a "majority" of people that have fallen prey to the misrepresented agenda of those
behind this war, however it is not a "vast majority".

Rest assured that the inconvenience of a day of lost productivity is small compared to the killing
and maiming we are doing right now. Even for those that believe the war is just and that the
"collateral damage" (innocent human bloodshed) is an unavoidable consequence, one would think that
even a semblence of reverence for life would allow them to go beyond the impatience of getting on
with business as usual.

(RattRigg) said:

And Id say the fault lies with the Iraqi dictator who brought this on his people by his refusal to
comply with the UN resolutions.

So...you would support military action against any leader who refuses to comply with UN resolutions?

--kyler

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

It is currently a "majority" of people that have fallen prey to the misrepresented agenda of those
behind this war, however it is not a

"vast

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

majority".

It is a vast majority. Polls place support of the action in Iraq at 70% or better. Thats a pretty
big margin.

As far as having fallen prey to a misrepresented agenda, Id say check your mirror.

"RattRigg" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

It is currently a "majority" of people that have fallen prey to the misrepresented agenda of
those behind this war, however it is not a

"vast

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

majority".

It is a vast majority. Polls place support of the action in Iraq at 70% or better. Thats a pretty
big margin.

The polls I just saw on msnbc said 62% in favor and 35% against. That's almost 100 million US
citizens that don't want an illegal unjust unprovoked war. When you take into account the rest of
the world the situation reverses to the vast majority of the world opposing this war.

Quoted message said:

As far as having fallen prey to a misrepresented agenda, Id say check your mirror.

My mirror shows someone who knows violence does not bring peace. Someone who knows that control of
that part of the world means control of the worlds oil supply. Someone who knows that this
administration has deep ties to big oil. Someone who knows that the US is guilty of as many and as
nasty of human rights violations as the so called enemy. Someone who knows that completely
devastating a country and its innocent people will increase the threat of terrorism. Someone who
knows that spending billions of dollars to destroy and then rebuild a country while we face record
levels of deficit is theft on top of murder. Someone who knows that all this ends with Halliburton
and other's in the 'ol boy network gaining contracts and the US in control of Southeast Asia and
Russia's oil spigot.

Here's a few perspectives from Americans currently in Iraq:
greenjon.comTruthAndLies.htmOpen ↗

"one of the six billion" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"RattRigg" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>It is currently a "majority" of people that have fallen prey to the misrepresented agenda of
>those behind this war, however it is not a

"vast

Quoted message said:

>majority".

It is a vast majority. Polls place support of the action in Iraq at 70% or better. Thats a
pretty big margin.

The polls I just saw on msnbc said 62% in favor and 35% against. That's almost 100 million US
citizens that don't want an illegal unjust

unprovoked

Quoted message said:

war. When you take into account the rest of the world the situation reverses to the vast majority
of the world opposing this war.

but weren't you getting tired of the same old [censored] on TV every night, now at least we can watch a
real action show!

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

As far as having fallen prey to a misrepresented agenda, Id say check your mirror.

Quoted message said:

My mirror shows someone who knows violence does not bring peace.

Probably also shows a brain dead [censored]! <G

"one of the six billion" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...
|
| Here's a few perspectives from Americans currently in Iraq:
| greenjon.comTruthAndLies.htmOpen ↗

Here's another perspective, from some Americans that just escaped from Iraq:

"A group of American anti-war demonstrators who came to Iraq with Japanese human shield volunteers
made it across the border today with 14 hours of uncensored video, all shot without Iraqi government
minders present. Kenneth Joseph, a young American pastor with the Assyrian Church of the East, told
UPI the trip "had shocked me back to reality." Some of the Iraqis he interviewed on camera "told me
they would commit suicide if American bombing didn't start. They were willing to see their homes
demolished to gain their freedom from Saddam's bloody tyranny. They convinced me that Saddam was a
monster the likes of which the world had not seen since Stalin and [censored]. He and his sons are sick
sadists. Their tales of slow torture and killing made me ill, such as people put in a huge shredder
for plastic products, feet first so they could hear their screams as bodies got chewed up from foot
to head." upi.comview.cfmOpen ↗

"Randall R Schulz" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Ken,

Depleted uranium is the left-over from refining uranium with the naturally occurring mixture of
isotopes (only .72 percent of which is the fissionable 235U). The fissionable 235U is used for
reactors and explosives and the remaining 238U is just a metal. It's only mildly radioactive--it's
half-life is ten times that of 235U (it's an alpha emitter, so it's only a health problem if it
gets inside your body

somehow).

Quoted message said:

DU is used for purposes where a very dense metal is desired.

From a chemical standpoint (irrespective of isotopic variation), Uranium has a strong oxygen
affinity: "Metallic uranium tarnishes in air and when finely divided ignites spontaneously."

Randy

Both the Pentagon and the British Ministry of Defence officially deny that there is any significant
danger from exposure to DU ammunition. And whilst it is conceivable that the US led attacks on
Iraq's nuclear power stations could be a contributory factor, most reseachers point to DU as the
most likely source of both deformities and cancers. The rising number of cases in Iraq, particularly
in the South where the greatest concentration of DU was fired, is simply staggering. Iraqi
physicians have never encountered anything like it, and have made the perfectly reasonable point
that similar increases in cancer and deformities were experienced in Japan after the two US atomic
bomb attacks. Cancer has increased between 7 and 10 fold; deformities between 4 and 6 fold. Yet the
US was well aware of the potential effects on civilians and military personnel of the chemical
toxicity and radiological properties of DU ammunition long before the Gulf war began, as the
following excerpts of a US Army document categorically state: "Aerosol DU (Depleted Uranium)
exposures to soldiers on the battlefield could be significant with potential radiological and
toxicological effects. [...] Under combat conditions, the most exposed individuals are probably
ground troops that re-enter a battlefield following the exchange of armour-piercing munitions. [...]
We are simply highlighting the potential for levels of DU exposure to military personnel during
combat that would be unacceptable during peacetime operations. [...DU is..]... a low level alpha
radiation emitter which is linked to cancer when exposures are internal, [and] chemical toxicity
causing kidney damage. [...] Short term effects of high doses can result in death, while long term
effects of low doses have been linked to cancer. [...] Our conclusion regarding the health and
environmental acceptability of DU penetrators assume both controlled use and the presence of
excellent health physics management practices. Combat conditions will lead to the uncontrolled
release of DU. [...] The conditions of the battlefield, and the long term health risks to natives
and combat veterans may become issues in the acceptability of the continued use of DU kinetic
penetrators for military applications."
- Excerpts from the July 1990 Science and Applications International Corporation report: ' Kinetic
Energy Penetrator Environment and Health Considerations', as included in Appenix D - US Army
Armaments, Munitions and Chemical Command report: 'Kinetic Energy Penetrator Long Term Strategy
Study, July 1990' The US was also well aware of the long-term dangers of DU contamination, and
played it down, as the following memo and document make clear: "There has been and continues to be
a concern regarding the impact of DU on the environment. Therefore, if no-one makes a case for the
effectiveness of DU on the battlefield, DU rounds may become politically unacceptable and thus be
deleted from the arsenal. I believe we should keep this sensitive issue in mind when action
reports are written." - Lt. Col. M.V. Ziehmn, Los Alamos National Laboratory memorandum, March 1st
1991 "Soldiers may be incidentally exposed to DU from dust and smoke on the battlefield. The Army
Surgeon General has determined that it is unlikely that these soldiers will receive a significant
internal DU exposure. Medical follow-up is not warranted for soldiers who experience incidental
exposure from dust or smoke. [...] Since DU weapons are openly available on the world arms market,
DU weapons will be used in future conflicts. The number of DU patients on future battlefields
probably will be significantly higher because other countries will use systems containing DU.
[...] DU is a low-level radioactive waste, and, therefore, must be disposed of in a licensed
repository. [...] No international law, treaty, regulation, or custom requires the United States
to remediate the Persian Gulf war battlefields."- Report by the US Army Environmental Policy
Institute: 'Health and Consequences of Depleted Uranium use in the US army,' June 1995

We are not liberating people by killing them. We are not providing democracy by overthrowing their
government and installing one of our choice which has promised to dishonour any business agreements
(oil) with France, Russia and other countries in favor of the US. The sanctions of the last 12 years
combined with the devistation of the Gulf war has killed more than
1.2 million innocent people in Iraq, 500,000 were children. That's far more than anything Sadam has
done. What we are doing now is also going to end up taking a bigger toll than what he would do. No
one is saying Sadam isn't bad. Amnesty International has been calling for UN monitoring of human
rights violations in Iraq for the last 12 years. But the US operating under the pretense of human
rights is a farce. We along with the UN could have been doing things and could still be that are
non-violent to address the human rights issues over there.

These two sites have accounts from actual people over in Iraq as opposed to a news agencies account
of someones account: greenjon.comshieldOpen ↗ humanshields.orghumanshields.orgOpen ↗

"P e t e F a g e r l i n" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"one of the six billion" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...
|
| Here's a few perspectives from Americans currently in Iraq:
| greenjon.comTruthAndLies.htmOpen ↗

Here's another perspective, from some Americans that just escaped from

Iraq:

Quoted message said:

"A group of American anti-war demonstrators who came to Iraq with

Japanese human shield

Quoted message said:

volunteers made it across the border today with 14 hours of uncensored

video, all shot

Quoted message said:

without Iraqi government minders present. Kenneth Joseph, a young

American pastor with the

Quoted message said:

Assyrian Church of the East, told UPI the trip "had shocked me back to

reality." Some of

Quoted message said:

the Iraqis he interviewed on camera "told me they would commit suicide if

American bombing

Quoted message said:

didn't start. They were willing to see their homes demolished to gain

their freedom from

Quoted message said:

Saddam's bloody tyranny. They convinced me that Saddam was a monster the

likes of which

Quoted message said:

the world had not seen since Stalin and [censored]. He and his sons are sick

sadists. Their

Quoted message said:

tales of slow torture and killing made me ill, such as people put in a

huge shredder for

Quoted message said:

plastic products, feet first so they could hear their screams as bodies

got chewed up from

Quoted message said:

foot to head." upi.comview.cfmOpen ↗

Ken NY) said:

On Sat, 22 Mar 2003 22:43:52 -0800, "one of the six billion" <[email hidden]>
ejaculated:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Both the Pentagon and the British Ministry of Defence officially deny that there is any
significant danger from exposure to DU ammunition. And whilst it is conceivable that the US led
attacks on Iraq's nuclear power stations could be a contributory factor, most reseachers point to
DU as the most likely source of both deformities and cancers.

Do you mean that we could be killing people with depleted uranium? Isn't that the purpose
of warfare, killing people and breaking things?

Hmm. I thought the (current) pretense for invading Iraq was that he had things like chemical and
biological weapons. You know, the kind of things that would spread terrible affliction and disease
among combatants and non-combatants alike.

So, Ken, are you saying that mustard gas and disease agents are bad, but depleted uranium is OK?
Sounds like your standards are a little inconsistent.

No, come to think of it, your standards have been remarkably consistent. They run straight down the
political party lines. I guess that makes life easy. Saves all that complicated _thinking_!

--
Frank Krygowski [email hidden]