Talk:March 17, 2007 anti-war protest

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Politics Portal
This article is supported by WikiProject Anti-war, a collective approach to organizing and unifying articles related to the anti-war movement. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Stub This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the Project's quality scale. See comments

Contents

[edit] Counter-protesters

I added a bit about the speculated reason that so many counter-protesters showed up. This is a great article (I was there protesting the war), but I fear it may be lacking in credibility since it seems more than a little biased against the counter-protesters. If anyone can add more from their side please do. --(Dodavehu 13:35, 22 March 2007 (UTC))

I tend to agree with that rationale, that the black bloc's graffiti on the Capitol on J27 made more of a splash than anything else. I was featured on the blog of Michelle Malkin, and received hate mail about it, and much of it was about the fear of graffiti on the memorials. SchuminWeb (Talk) 16:29, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

I participated in the protest and the claim by the Gathering of Eagles that counter-protesters outnumbered the war protesters simply is not true. The war protest march completely filled the Arlington Memorial bridge densely with people through its entire span and more than two vehicle lanes wide (the bridge was closed to vehicle traffic). The march continued to the Pentagon, and people were arriving there even while large numbers were still departing from the Linconln Memorial area. There were a few counter-protesters at the side but never in large numbers. The largest group of counter protesters was at 23rd street and Constitution Ave. which numbered around 50 - 100 people. There were a few other small groups at various places but not in large numbers.

I respect the viewpoints of the GOE, as I also support our troops fighting overseas, but the claim that counterprotesters outnumbered the protesters simply is not true.

VR

[edit] Attendance By Both Sides

Some observations by a participant on the GOE side of the March.

[edit] Numbers of protesters

There were videos made by one or more news services of the entire crossing of the Memorial Bridge by the anti-war group. The news services have yet to publish a count citing this evidence.

[edit] Number of counter-protesters

The official Gathering OF Eagles website had an electronic sign-up sheet of participants that numbered slightly less than 1900. Although many of the signatores announced they were bringing others to the march, this must be weighed against the snowy weather that slowed highway traffic to the DC area the day and night before the march. There were cancelations due to weather on both sides.

Unofficial observations of attendence by both sides frequently fail to mention the starting time for GOE rally being much earlier, 8AM, versus the Noon time start for the anti-war march. The focus of the GOE was a rally and the protection of monuments during the entire stay of the anti-war protesters. This observer cannot support the claims of 30,000 counter-protesters or of the counter-protestors outnumbering the protester side.

That there were many more counter-protesters(veterans)than had ever shown up before for an anti-war(Iraq) march cannot be disputed. Sauras,04:28, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Groups Opposing or Supporting the War

Nice overall article but I believe that specific lists of groups opposing or supporting the war should be omited from the main article. There is nothing to substantiate that members of these groups were actually present. The ANSWER coalition may included groups such as Gold Star Families for Peace, World Can't Wait, Veterans Against the Iraq War, etc., and the Gathering of Eagles coalition may include groups such as Rolling Thunder, Nam Knights, etc., but these lists do not add to the overall article in a meaningful or usefull way. Any reader that wishes to know more about either of these coalitions can easily find that information in the external links already listed at the end of the article. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 4.152.213.156 (talk) 01:55, 22 April 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Protesting Treatment of Guantánamo Bay Prisoners

I added a bit about some protesters I saw in orange suits. I tried to add a picture but could not figure out how to do it. There are some good photographs available in the public domain which can be used. If someone has the time will they please add one of the following images to the article: March 17 160.jpg http://www.flickr.com/photos/anastasiagomes/424948636/in/set-72157600006134304/ or: March 17 152.jpg http://www.flickr.com/photos/anastasiagomes/424948284/in/set-72157600006134304/

These protesters walked the entire length of the protest march which culminated at the Pentagon, and thus were seen by many people. I feel one of the images would really serve well to portray the atmosphere of the protest. Thanks. VR —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Astuteoak (talk • contribs) 01:36, 23 April 2007 (UTC).

Actually, according to the flickr page you linked, it says "© All rights reserved". Therefore, unless it is your own work and you're willing to license it under GFDL or another similar license, we can't use it on Wikipedia. SchuminWeb (Talk) 06:25, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

A photograph of protester with orange suit has been released with a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license. I have added it; hope others agree it benefits article (click photo for other details of the photo). Lithiumflash 23:56, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Concussion

Also, it should be known that there was only one explosive thrown, and it came from inside the black bloc. I saw the guy reach back and chuck it into the air between us and the police, it was a firecracker at worst.

But about the "less than lethal" chemical agent, yeah: they were rarin' to go. I think that the portion about marching back across the bridge should be given more coverage, it received none in the Washington Post and I think it was one of the greatest things I have been a part of. The idea was to go back into DC and protest in front of the recruitment office downtown. A group of police rushed the bloc from the back and bike-cops (I kid you not, as in: bicycle, not motorcycle) came in and tackled the leader of the group and one other person whom they were able to catch. I have a newfound respect for the policing ability of bike cops. Our group effectively shut down all traffic for 1/4th of DC because some 12 odd paddy wagons quickly showed up and the group dispersed. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Aerabee (talk • contribs) 02:51, 25 April 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Spitting incident

I seem to remember quite a bit of coverage concerning a man in uniform who alleged someone spat on him. A New York Times reporter allegedly witnessed the incident, but did not specifically state this in the published story. Protesters reportedly denied spitting on him, but there were suggestions that someone spat on the ground nearby - not intentionally directed at the soldier. The incident was used by both sides as either an un-patriotic slur or unsubstantiated propaganda echoing similar allegations dating from the Vietnam War. Could someone please find the citations to support this? I do recall it getting a tremendous amount of air-time for the next several weeks.Happysomeone 17:57, 7 August 2007 (UTC)Happysomeone

[edit] Additional coverage: Other Cities

From the San Francisco march: http://www.novatoadvance.com/articles/2007/03/21/news/news05.txt —Preceding unsigned comment added by Happysomeone (talk • contribs)

[edit] Caption for Third Photo in Article

I am returning the caption of the third photo in the article to "Protester decries human rights abuses by U.S. military". A previous version of this caption contained superficial information and was awkward in its grammatical flow. Regarding the issue of human rights violations the United States Supreme Court has indeed ruled that practices taking place at the Guantanamo Bay military prison are unlawful and violate the U.S. Uniform Code of Military Justice, and Common Article 3 of the Third Geneva Convention. (U.S. Supreme Court ruling; June 29, 2006, Hamdan v. Rumsfeld) Astuteoak (talk) 14:30, 23 February 2008 (UTC)