|
Comment on this article |
View comments |
Email this Feature
|
|
News :: Protest Activity |
|
Occupation Is Not Liberation! |
Current rating: 0 |
by Jan & Durl Kruse
Email: durljan (nospam) earthlink.net (unverified!) |
25 Oct 2003
|
|
Over 50 people gathered in the misty rain on Prospect Avenue in Champaign today to call attention to the October 25 National Day of Protest againt the US occupation of Iraq and the lies of the Bush Administration. Anti-War Protesters will be out on Prospect again next Saturday November 1 from 2-4. Join us! |
|
|
Prospect for Peace Saturday October 25. |
Related stories on this site:
Local Groups Join National Anti-occupation Protests
|
Comments
|
Re: Occupation Is Not Liberation! |
by Jack Ryan
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 1
29 Oct 2003
Modified: 11:13:44 AM |
Wow, I count thirteen people in the photo. I guess with Liberal math that equates to "over 50". In the words of a great leader "Now is not the time to get wobbly". (Maggie Thatcher) As a patriot, I understand full well that you and your kind have been wobbly from the beginning. At the same time, you must understand, that our enemies are simply taking a page out of the Vietnam playbook. Which is, the only way to defeat the US Military is to erode support at home and destroy the morale of the fighting men and women on the ground.
With each protest, you embolden our enemies and invite further more devastating attacks both in Iraq and at home. Incidentally, poles from Iraq show that there is overwhelming support among the majority of the Iraqi people for a strong US presense in their country. Yes there have been deaths of our soldiers and while tragic, it is absolutely necessary that we finish this job and proceed on to the next one.
We never claimed that it would be easy or free and we never said it would be done quickly. We did however, say we will fight to complete victory is achieved. So, go ahead and stand out in the rain, sleet, and snow. Hold your signs of hatred for the country and our leadership. We will continue to support our troops, while you in the minority silently cheer news of each fallen soldier.
Ultimately we will win as we almost always do and your sorry asses will be saved along with the rest of us.
Jack |
|
Still Waiting For The Euphoria |
by John Zogby
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
29 Oct 2003
|
A Poll Among Iraqis Indicates the Bush Team (including Jack Ryan) Was Wrong in Foreseeing a Warm Welcome for the Occupiers
[And just what the hell is a Republican Senate candidate doing wasting his time attacking people for exercising their free speech? He must have no original ideas on which to campaign...nothing new for Republicans, though.]
Five months after the end of the war, Americans remain deeply ambivalent over whether it was right or wrong to invade Iraq. In part, that's because it's still not clear whether we were, in fact, welcomed by the people we set out to liberate.
Most people know by now that the popularity of the United States has dramatically declined across the Arab world during the last half year. But how about in Iraq itself? Are Iraqis glad that we came? Do they see a brighter future ahead? Do they want us to stay and see them through this mess or do they want us to pack up and get out?
In August, I conducted the first serious public opinion survey of Iraqis since the end of the war, in hopes of getting answers to some of these questions.
Polling in Iraq is not easy for many reasons. People are scared, unused to free speech and often eager to give the answers they think you want to hear.
Unable to conduct a U.S.-style telephone survey, we instead sent out dozens of door-to-door interviewers to talk to women in their households and men in public places. Bowing to custom, women interviewed women and men interviewed men.
What would be a routine process in most countries was anything but in Iraq. Our teams of interviewers were caught in a crossfire in Ramadi during an attack on a military convoy. In Kirkuk, one of our supervisors was seized by Kurdish forces and was not released until several calls were made and a bounty paid to locals. Interviewers were detained several times in Basra, where they were also chased by an unidentified automobile. And checkpoints manned by armed soldiers were everywhere, making travel difficult.
We conducted 600 interviews in four metropolitan areas that we determined would give us the right cross section of the population: Basra (mainly Shiite), Ramadi, (near Baghdad and mainly Sunni), Kirkuk (Kurd and Turkmen), and Mosul (Sunni and Christian). Our results date from late August, but we have no reason to believe opinions have changed substantially since then.
What we found is that Iraqis, like people all around the world, hold nuanced views. They are glad to see Saddam Hussein gone as shown by their desire to punish members of the old regime but they don't really trust the Americans who drove him out.
They are intrigued by democracy but worry that it may not be compatible with their culture. They object to being occupied and are eager to take the reins of government themselves. But those in the minority are a little more nervous at the prospect of democracy than those in the majority.
Here are some specifics:
Seven in 10 told us that Iraq would be a better country and that they themselves would be better off in five years.
Only two in five (39%) said that "democracy can work in Iraq," while a majority (51%) agreed that "democracy is a Western way of doing things and will not work here." Shiites who suffered the most under Hussein and who make up the majority in Iraq are more evenly split about democracy (45%-46%), while Sunnis are far less favorable.
Asked about the kind of government that would be best for Iraq, half of all respondents (49%) said they preferred "a democracy with elected representatives guided by Sharia (Islamic law)." Twenty-four percent prefer an "Islamic state ruled by clerics based on Sharia." Only one in five (21%) preferred a "secular democracy with elected representatives."
Three out of five made it clear that they wanted Iraqis left alone to work out a government for themselves, while only one in three want the United States and Britain to "help make sure a fair government is set up." Two out of three Iraqis and seven in 10 Sunnis want U.S. and British forces out of Iraq in a year.
Three out of four Iraqis want the leaders of Hussein's Baath Party punished. Osama bin Laden is viewed favorably by 36% and unfavorably by 47%.
Half of all Iraqis interviewed say the United States will hurt Iraq over the next five years. Only 36% say the U.S. will help.
One thing is clear: The predicted euphoria of Iraqis has not materialized.
Months after the U.S. military victory, American policymakers and troops are left not only with the daunting task of nation-building and restoring the country's devastated infrastructure but also with having to win the hearts and minds of Iraqis who are not keen on the U.S. occupation.
Iraqis, like their fellow Arabs, feel victimized by a history of betrayal and humiliation at the hands of Western powers. It appears that U.S. policymakers overlooked or misread this sentiment.
John Zogby is president and chief executive officer of an independent polling company in Utica, N.Y., and Washington, D.C.
Copyright 2003 Los Angeles Times
http://www.latimes.com/
Just Like The Pre-War Intel: How The Poll Results On Iraq Were Manipulated
by James Zogby
The danger, of course, is that painting a rosy picture that doesn't exist is a recipe for a failed policy. Wishing something to be can't make it so. At some point, reality intervenes. It's a hard lesson to learn, but it is dangerous to ignore its importance.
Early in President Bush's recent public relations campaign to rebuild support for the US war effort in Iraq, Vice President Cheney appeared on "Meet the Press." Attempting to make the case that the US was winning in Iraq, Cheney made the following observations:
"There was a poll done, just random in the last week, first one I've seen carefully done; admittedly, it's a difficult area to poll in. Zogby International did it with American Enterprise magazine. But that's got very positive news in it in terms of the numbers it shows with respect to the attitudes to what Americans have done.
"One of the questions it asked is: 'If you could have any model for the kind of government you'd like to have' - and they were given five choices - 'which would it be?' The US wins hands down. If you want to ask them do they want an Islamic government established, by 2: 1margins they say no, including the Shiite population. If you ask how long they want Americans to stay, over 60 percent of the people polled said they want the US to stay for at least another year. So admittedly there are problems, especially in that area where Saddam Hussein was from, where people have benefited most from his regime and who've got the most to lose if we're successful in our enterprise, and continuing attacks from terror. But to suggest somehow that that's representative of the country at large or the Iraqi people are opposed to what we've done in Iraq or are actively and aggressively trying to undermine it, I just think that's not true."
In fact, Zogby International (ZI - http://www.zogby.com/) in Iraq had conducted the poll, and the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) did publish their interpretation of the findings. But the AEI's "spin" and the vice president's use of their "spin" created a faulty impression of the poll's results and, therefore, of the attitudes of the Iraqi people.
For example, while Cheney noted that when asked what kind of government they would like, Iraqis chose "the US... hands down," in fact, the results of the poll are actually quite different. Twenty-three percent of Iraqis say that they would like to model their new government after the US; 17.5 percent would like their model to be Saudi Arabia; 12 percent say Syria, 7 percent say Egypt and 37 percent say "none of the above." That's hardly "winning hands down."
When given the choice as to whether they "would like to see the American and British forces leave Iraq in six months, one year, or two years," 31.5 percent of Iraqis say these forces should leave in six months; 34 percent say a year, and only 25 percent say two or more years.
So while technically Cheney might say that "over 60 percent (actually it's 59 percent) ... want the US to stay at least another year," an equally correct observation would be that 65.5 percent want the US and Britain to leave in one year or less.
Other numbers found in the poll go further to dampen the vice president's and the AEI's rosy interpretations. For example, when asked if "democracy can work well in Iraq," 51 percent said "no; it is a Western way of doing things and will not work here."
And attitudes toward the US were not positive. When asked whether over the next five years, they felt that the "US would help or hurt Iraq, "50 percent said that the US would hurt Iraq, while only 35.5 percent felt the US would help the country. On the other hand, 61 percent of Iraqis felt that Saudi Arabia would help Iraq in the next five years, as opposed to only 7.5 percent, who felt Saudi Arabia would hurt their country. Some 50.5 percent felt that the United Nations would help Iraq, while 18.5 percent felt it would hurt. Iran's rating was very close to the US', with 53.5 percent of Iraqis saying Iran would hurt them in the next five years, while only 21.5 percent felt that Iran might help them.
It is disturbing that the AEI and the vice president could get it so wrong. Their misuse of the polling numbers to make the point that they wanted to make, resembles the way critics have noted that the administration used "intelligence data" to make their case to justify the war.
The danger, of course, is that painting a rosy picture that doesn't exist is a recipe for a failed policy. Wishing something to be can't make it so. At some point, reality intervenes. It's a hard lesson to learn, but it is dangerous to ignore its importance.
For the administration to continue to tell itself and the American people that "all is well," only means that needed changes in policy will not be made.
Consider some of the other poll findings:
* Over 55 percent give a negative rating to "how the US military is dealing with Iraqi civilians." Only 20 percent gave the US military a positive rating.
* By a margin of 57 percent to 38.5 percent, Iraqis indicate that they would support "Arab forces" providing security in their country.
* When asked how they would describe the attacks on the US military, 49 percent described them as "resistance operations." Only 29 percent saw them as attacks by "Ba'ath loyalists."
* When asked whom they preferred to "provide security and restore order in their country," only 6.5 percent said the US. Twenty-seven percent said the US and the UN together, 14.5 percent preferred only the UN. And the largest group, 45 percent, said they would prefer the "Iraqi military" to do the job alone.
There are important lessons in all of this. Lessons policy makers ought to heed if they are to help Iraq move forward. What the Iraqi people appear to be telling us is that they have hope for the future, but they want the help of their neighbors more than that of the US.
That may not be what Washington wants to hear, but it ought to listen nevertheless. Because if policy makers continue to bend the data to meet their desired policy, then this hole they are digging will only get deeper.
Copyright: Arab News C2003
http://www.arabnews.com |
|
Re: Occupation (of My Mind By The Right Wing) Is Not Liberation! |
by Jack Ryan
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
29 Oct 2003
Modified: 06:28:59 PM |
Once again I must offer my apologies for my prior statements. I must admit I drove by the protest and in reality saw that the group was much larger than the photo shows. I personally counted over 80 brave people out on Prospect in the rain trying to "use the right to discent before we all loose" it.
At times I fear my dark side comes forth and I say all the crazy unamerican things you might have read in my other comments on this entry. Please overlook these moments of regression. One of these days I will get it all together and who knows I may even be brave enough to stand with the true patriots and join the group on Prospect. Until I am able to gather the strength just ignore my temporary lunacy and please don't laugh at my inablity to maintain anything other than a wobbly state of mind!
In Peace and Joy,
The NEW & Improved
Jack Ryan |
|
Re: Occupation Is Not Liberation! |
by Jack Ryan
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
29 Oct 2003
Modified: 06:58:33 PM |
Please pass the spell check!
In my haste to post both my comments I made spelling mistakes. Since I do not want those reading these postings to mistake mistakes for ignorance please note I did not mean to write "poles from Iraq" I meant polls from Iraq. In my later posting....the one I made once my 'mind cleared and I saw the light' I meant to say "right to descent".
When I am out with you Saturday November 1 on Prospect....
Help me out. If I make more spelling errors on the sign I bring to protest this crazy war, kindly let me know and maybe some one could bring a big eraser for me just in case!
LOVE,
JACK |
|
Re: Jack's "comment" |
by Butch
ejspen (nospam) insight.rr.com (verified) |
Current rating: 0
10 Nov 2003
|
Jack, may I suggest that rather than protest a war to supress those who would happily NUKE you, had they the chance, perhaps that day would better be spent doing some reading.
"Treason" by Anne Coulter is a good place to start
:)
|
|
Re: Spell Check |
by Butch
ejspen (nospam) insight.rr.com (unverified) |
Current rating: 0
10 Nov 2003
|
I meant "suppress", of course.
|
|
Re: Occupation Is Not Liberation! |
by Illinois Citizen
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
21 Dec 2003
|
Hello Jack Ryan,
Are you the same Jack Ryan who is the Illinois Republican Candidate for U.S. Senate? |
|
