How Radicals Have Hijacked the Peace Movement





Mr. Radosh is Senior Adjunct Fellow at the Hudson Institute, and author of Commies: A Journey Through the Old Left, the New Left and the Leftover Left.

 Whether its Military, History, War tactics and strategies or weaponry Military book club covers it all.

For a while, self proclaimed "moderates" in the emerging peace movement argued that there had to be a serious, mainstream and effective anti-war movement. Like the radicals, the moderates argued against going to war against Iraq. What disturbed them was not the end goal---but the sponsorship and tone of the growing mass antiwar movement, which once again, scheduled a massive March on Washington. David Corn of the Nation magazine complained that the peace movement would never reach the churches and union halls if it was led by those who praised Fidel Castro, convicted cop-killer Mumia Abu Jamal, North Korean dictator Kim Jong Il, and which threw in defense of Serb war criminal Slobodan Milosevic for good measure. Todd Gitlin, the distinguished Columbia University professor of sociology and communications, echoed Corn's concern in the pages of Mother Jones, writing that the current movement was too "provincial to stop the coming war." Its problem was simple. It was "turning the movement toward the bitter-end orthodoxy of the Old Left." And writing in the Chronicle of Higher Education, Prof. Michael Berube opined that America needs a "Mature, Legitimate and Popular" antiwar movement. The problem he was dealing with: The "demonstrations to date have been led by unreconstructed Communist-front groups."

These writers and others made these warnings as strong as they could. Time has passed now, and it seems their pleas were made in vain. This past weekend, as last year, the growing antiwar movement was still being led by the same anti-American and extreme pro-Communist group lets as before. Thousands assembled in our nation's capital and in San Francisco, parading out the same old left-wing speakers to vent their outrage on America's supposed aggression.

And once again, the sponsor of the march was Act Now to Stop War and End Racism (ANSWER) a group run out of Ramsey Clark's International Action Center, a front group of the Communist Workers World Party. And once again, despite their protestations, the so-called moderates enlisted en masse, lending their names and their numbers to the extremist's scheduled action. Their lame argument was a simple one: they know how to organize. Nobody listens to speeches or looks at placards; all that is counted are bodies opposed to the war on Iraq.

Today, the ANSWER coalition claims that the threat that menaces the world today is not the "purported" one from Iraq, but the "actual" threat of the use of "Weapons of Mass Destruction" by George W. Bush, who is planning "preemptive wars of aggression."

To these Communist march organizers, the purpose of U.S. policy is not to neutralize the ever growing threat from a nuclear Iraq, but to "spend $200 billion …so that …Big Oil and banking corporations can take control of and profit from the oil of the Persian/Arabian Gulf."

And just as they argued before the liberation of Afghanistan that any war there would be unwelcome and would lead to hundreds of thousands of innocent lives lost, they argue now that a new Gulf war "will be a catastrophe," as the U.S.--not Saddam Hussein with his SCUD missiles and chemical and biological arsenal-- threaten our soldiers "and civilians to vast toxic exposure" through the use of "depleted uranium weapons."

And so their repetitious and now so well known slogan: "No Blood for Oil."

In their world, the U.S. is oppressing peoples everywhere---supporting Israel's "murderous war of occupation," engaging in "a policy of U.S.-supported terrorism," and leading the world in a dangerous direction. Their perspective is the warped world view of a discredited Communist system and its spent leadership; no wonder they herald the brutal regime of Kim in North Korea and think that Saddam Hussein is a benign and well-meaning leader. At the March, its extremist Communist leaders presented the songs of Patti Smith and the words of actress Jessica Lange, a woman who already distinguished herself in London a week ago by stating that: "I hate Bush. I despise him and his entire administration…It makes me feel ashamed to come from the United States… it is humiliating." To attack Iraq, she added, would be "unconstitutional, immoral and illegal."

She is a woman, it appears, who fit right in with the Maoist ideology of the March's sponsors. As for Patti Smith, she explained that "I don't care who it is [who organizes the protest] as long as they feel the same."

Hearing these people and their slogans and looking at their signs brings to mind the admonition by John Lennon in the 1960's, when he was asked to write a song for the Movement. His response, "But if you go carrying pictures of Chairman Mao, You' ain't gonna make it with anyone anyhow," is needed more than ever.
That Mao is now replaced by the likes of Kim Jong-Il and Yassir Arafat makes little difference. Or perhaps they should sing the refrain of another one of those antiwar anthems from the days gone by, but address it to themselves and the March leaders: "When Will They Ever Learn, When Will They Ever Learn?"


This article was originally published by the New York Post and is reprinted with permission of the author.


comments powered by Disqus

More Comments:


Jonathan Dresner - 2/3/2003

Ron Radosh is making the same mistake that he accuses anti-war activists of making: he's still thinking in 1960s political terms. There is a massive mainstream movement against the war, but it isn't rallying in the streets. It is organizing on the Internet, in groups like moveon.org and the coalitions of peace organizations (including anti-american groups like Quakers) which have presented petitions with tens of thousands of signatures. There have also been plenty of public demonstrations without Trotskyite (or whatever it is he's still afraid of) leadership, in smaller towns and cities.


Lloyd Drako - 1/31/2003

I know it isn't 1950, and Joe McCarthy has been dead lo these many years. My point is not that "Commies" are everywhere, or that they pose any sort of armed threat to the US. (Islamists have proven quite capable of taking up their slack!) However, many organizers of the new antiwar movement, and many of the more prominent figures on the podium at antiwar rallies, are not simply antiwar but anti-American to the core. They rail against not just the present US government but the whole American system, American culture, American values, American habits from SUV-driving to meat-eating. How long will it be before they resurrect the old spelling "Amerika?" None of this in any way benefits the cause of the many honest citizens who simply wonder how many Americans will die in a war with Iraq, and what long-term complications may ensue.


Gus Moner - 1/26/2003

Come now Mr Drako, stop the red-baiting propaganda. There were a majority of non-communist people organising the marches. For a few that may have participated, or participated in the organisation, or became co-sponsors, so what? People of all sorts of political persuasions oppose the war based on the evidence available today, and that is the point that you and your fellow paranoiacs are trying to hide from by shrieking about Commies everywhere. It is not 1950 anymore, sir.

Unlike the KK and right-wing or Aryan type groups, who today pose a real threat and are armed and dangerous, the Commies are peaceful and discredited and humbled after the debacle of the so-called Communist dictatorships. They really were not Communist at all, just mafia-like oligarchies using the values of the Communists for propaganda.


Steve Brody - 1/26/2003


Gus,I find it fascinating, although not very relevant, that you used examples from the 19th century to support your "moral relativistic" argument that we're really no different than the despots we oppose.


Steve Brody - 1/26/2003


Gus, The fact that we have had "peace" with Iraq "since Kuwait" is based primarily on the fact that during that period, nothing was done to enforce the UN resolutions concerning Iraq. Which goes to show that if you look the other way, you can have "peace". I think they call that appeasement. Sounds like the strategy used by the French and English in the 1930's. Didn't work out that well for them.

By the way, what you call "peace" really hasn't been that peaceful. Nearly every day the Iraqi's take pot shots at coalition aircraft enforcing the UN approved "no-fly" zone.

You say that Afghan women prefer the burkqa? How the hell would you know that? Have you spoken to even one Afghan woman in Afghanistan? Besides, any one who doesn't want an education and prefers the burkqa is now free to make that choice. Under the Taliban, women who did want an education and a dress could expect a bullet or a beating. Is that preferable?

You claim that the situation in Afghanistan won't improve. How do you know? It's certainly not perfect, but it's getting better. If it wasn't, why is everybody coming back? It took most of a decade to rehabilitate Germany after WWII. Is that an argument for the Germans being better off under the Nazi's?

Gus, your comparison of capital punishment in this country to the summary execution that the Taliban performed on women whose only crime was a desire to read is a new low and illustrative of how far you'll reach as a apologist for the Taliban.


And the "conspiracy theory" that everyone refers to, Gus, is not the gas pipeline deal. Everyone knows about that. It's your implication that our war on terrorism in Afghanistan was all about the routing of the gas pipeline and not about routing the Al-Qaeda. Your a great one for demanding proof of others. What proof do you have for this theory? Until you post some, it's just another one of your "conspiracy theories". And are you now offering yourself as a prophet? How do you know what contracts will be voided or what booty, if any, Bush is giving out.

The fact is, Gus, when you speak about casualties in Afghanistan, and how many of UBL's minions were killed, you haven't got a clue. What has been reported are estimates that about one third of the Al-Qaeda operatives in Afghanistan were killed or captured. If you have better numbers, cite the source. You also constantly mis-quote civilian casualty figures in Afghanistan, first claiming 5000 " official " casualties, then backing down when called on your source for these numbers.
The truth is, you really don't know what you're talking about when you talk specifics about how many Al-Qaeda terrorists or civilians were killed in Afghanistan.


Gus Moner - 1/24/2003

Wow! Mr Kellum. You forgot a comma between alcoholic and illiterate.
: - )


Gus Moner - 1/24/2003

Let’s start with your first comment. “You can't have peace with leaders such as Saddam”. I want to draw your attention to the fact that we have had peace in the Iraqi region of the Orient since Kuwait. Apparently, something had been working before Bush and his team arrived that has avoided war. If there is a threat that requires war, we have a right to know about it beyond a simple “trust me”.

Next, we are graced with the following gem: “Old leftists have yet to answer for anything they supported. They supported N. Vietnam who executed about a million or so when we left Vietnam. Of course they feel no need to answer for that, they simply refuse to answer”.

Leftists in the Western nations needn’t answer for what they did not do. The Vietnamese, Russian, Chinese and all the rest need to do that. During the re-unification war in Vietnam, 1945-1975, the US, the puppet S. Vietnamese regimes and the French killed millions of Vietnamese, mostly civilians, in their anti-Communist campaigns. Will anyone answer for that? Or is it also approved? Just because they were killed in provocative and well known civilian areas by a trained military force does not eliminate the fact that we too have killed indiscriminately. What about Napalm or Agent Orange. Not chemical, you say?

You display an uncanny ignorance of the development of cultures and societies around the world. Not every woman wants to shed the Burkha, or be educated to serve as a working slave for the global exploiters. Apparently many, rightly or wrongly depending on one’s viewpoint, prefer their traditional role as homemakers and parents. I personally disagree with their appalling condition, vis-à-vis the Western woman, however I recognise it is not my role to interfere in the development of their societies nor proselytise the goodness of mine.

I can hardly call electrocution, lethal injections or gassing people humane behaviour, yet plenty of US states and the Federal government do just that. I do not support the torture and abuse of men or women, Shane. I cannot see how you can draw that conclusion. I hate to break the news to you, but the men of Afghanistan who ‘participated’ in the hiding of ObL have been put to run, few were killed. Most of the ones killed likely hadn’t a clue as to who ObL is anymore than we have a clue as to what is really happening in Iraq.

Where, Shane, where is the piper that punishes the USA, Israel or Britain for the killing of all these people with their smart bombs and missiles?

Of course I saw that news that Russia had just signed oil-field development agreements with Iraq. I am not comatose. You may be interested to know that Russia and Iraq had just two weeks earlier cancelled earlier contracts with a different Russian oil firm, one out of favour with that great anti-terrorist democrat, Putin. The new oil contract is with a firm clearly in the Putin orbit. What’s the price of a veto, 4,000 million?

Needless to say, the contracts entered into by previous Iraqi administrations will be voided by the US upon conquering the oil reserves of Iraq. Surely you know that from your equally well-informed discourse. The Bush administration is busy sharing out the war booty to their pals.

What socialists and communists are trying to control us? The ones hovering between your ears in UFOs? No nation or religion has clean hands Shane. The USA have killed well beyond the battlefield. We engaged in massive hunting and killing of civilians, their deportations and removal to concentration camps and land seizures in the Indian Wars, breaking dozens of treaties to secure what we now call the 48 contiguous states. Surely, the slavery period is filled with glorious humanitarianism. Just because it happened before you were born does not change the fact. “We have history to tell us to watch out for them”. The real question is who ‘them’ that we need to watch out for really are.


Lloyd Drako - 1/24/2003

No sensible conservative would attend a rally for whatever cause sponsored by the KKK or neo-Nazis, no aware gay person would attend a NAMBLA-organized gay-rights rally. They know full well that the media would fall on them like a pack of wolves.
Antiwar folk seem not to be so canny. They aren't "using" Stalinists and Kim Jong-Il supporters, they're letting such anti-American groups use them.


Lloyd Drako - 1/24/2003

No sensible conservative would attend a rally for whatever cause sponsored by the KKK or neo-Nazis, no aware gay person would attend a NAMBLA-organized gay-rights rally. They know full well that the media would fall on them like a pack of wolves.
Antiwar folk seem not to be so canny. They aren't "using" Stalinists and Kim Jong-Il supporters, they're letting such anti-American groups use them.


Bill Funke - 1/23/2003

Glad to see that there are still Red-baiters out there protecting us from the evils of godless communism. Also glad to see that they have finally noticed Corn's article, which was written last October-- just after the first rally. It's just too bad they couldn't have warned us gullible peaceniks about the nasty commies before the march...

A few hundred thousand of us around the world went to the first one because it was the only game in town at the time. Not many were interested in throwing Mumia and globalization into the mix, but went to protest a war. The latest one was the biggest game in town, so many more still went, and ignored the side issues.

The issue is, of course, not ANSWER. The issue is the looming hostilities.

ANSWER is good at this sort of organizing-- a lot better than the Freepers and others that tried to get counterdemonstrations together. But, that's about all they can do, and no one wants to hear much of the rest of their message. They are already receding into the background with thousands of smaller groups and coalitions around the country holding vigils, rallies, protests, and lobbying efforts against the war.

Yes, Radosh does have a point that the "left" is wandering around trying to find mainstream hooks, and I believe that the "left" (as well as the "right") is pretty well lost without a crisis to rally around. The "right" has managed to manufacture crises over the past few years, but now the "left" has a real one to deal with. There is a great amount of anti-war and "liberal" feeling out there with few rallying points, and we shall see how this plays out.




Chris Osborne - 1/23/2003

The remarks posted by Steve and AMac were brief but incisive. I too am bewildered by the reality that conservatives learned how to dump the KKK, the Nazis, and the militia groups a long time ago because they realized these organizations are a profound political embarassment and liability to conservative causes. Sadly, no such wisdom exists among many persons in the antiwar movement who are NOT Marxist-Leninists, violent anarchists, etc. Indeed Alexander Cockburn of Counterpunch actually defends the "Bonkerism" of the Looney Left as a means to hop on board the antiwar demonstrations they organize and come to control them in due course. Usually such patterns work the other way around, however, as witnessed by the Progressive Labor Party infiltrating and taking over Students for a Democratic Society in the 1960s and how Dr. Fred Newman and Lenora Fulani's wacky leftist cult took over the New Jewish Agenda and much of the Reform Party.
I guess many legitimate antiwar demonstrators really believe that groups such as the Spartacist League, Revolutionary Communist Party and Workers' World Party are going to draw the American masses into the antiwar movement like a magnet. I guess those are the same people who believe that 3% (the number of Americans who identify themselves as "Far Left" in a U.S. News and World Report survey several years ago) will somehow overcome the opposition of 97% (those Americans who are not Far Left). Or perhaps they still believe in Lenin's idea of a vanguard party (as if the U.S. government is as rickety as Kerensky's regime) leading the proletarian revolution.
The Left has still not learned even the most fundamental lessons of crafting a successful mass political appeal in America. As Todd Gitlin brilliantly implied, the antiwar movement will probably be "dead on arrival" before it really gets underway. Which is unfortunate from my viewpoint because I also oppose a prospective war with Iraq.


penis proud - 1/22/2003

Yep. Vaginara's screed is a caricature of some contemporary academic claptrap. I will continue to believe that even if some hapless professional organization awards it some prestigious prize.


Mark Newgent - 1/22/2003

This person is probably an agitator using a psudonym to incite an argument. Really, "Vaginara's" vitriol is way far out there for anyone to believe.

I have expereince with this sort of thing on the ACC boards, last week a Maryland fan with Duke handle was posting personal attacks against MD fans on the board to drum up controversey.


Shane - 1/22/2003

You can't have peace with leaders such as Saddam. Old leftists have yet to answer for anything they supported. They supported N. Vietnam who executed about a million or so when we left Vietnam. Of course they feel no need to answer for that, they simply refuse to answer. I take that as approval. Old leftists are against killing, they just want to designate who gets killed. They aren't against slavery, they just want to be the slave master. I'm sure women were happy and content in Afganistan. They weren't allowed an education and were entirely second class citizens without a single right. If they were raped they would be tried and executed. I'm glad you fully support torture and abuse of women, good for you. They participated in hiding a man who killed 3000 people in office buildings, they pay the piper.

If you didn't know it, the French and Russians actually have the contracts to develop the oil fields. They can only be executed when the trade restrictions are lifted. Of course, you knew this by your well informed discourse.

We still watch out for "commies" and "socialists" because the keep watching us waiting for their chance to control. Nothing like having a group setting on the side lines waiting to right all the world's wrongs no matter how many they have to kill to do so. We have killed in battle, only the "commie's" and "socialists" have had mass killings without war on their own people. We have history to tell us to watch out for them.


aqdas - 1/22/2003

i like sport alot .my favrate team is leeds united


Aravis - 1/22/2003

So what is your solution? If you reject the things in this article, then what do you agree with? And if the article was written by a gay hispanic female with a vaginalcentric perspective would it be more accurate?


Al Czervikjr - 1/21/2003


>>>>> Second, Gus, doesn't it make you the least bit uncomfortable that the demonstrations this past weekend were organized by supporters and apologists for Slobodon Milosevic and for a brutal, militaristic North Korean dictatorship...

>>Well, proof please. I know many people who were organised by people considered as responsible members of their communities. I think you are off base here. No one ‘supports’ N Korea...

You want proof? Check out David Corn's article posted on the Common Dreams web site here:

http://www.commondreams.org/views02/1031-08.htm.

Gus, you don't suppose that Corn and Common Dreams have joined the vast right wing conspiracy, do you?



Gus Moner - 1/21/2003

I caught that too. I was not going to reply, you don't actually think he was serious, do you?????????


Gus Moner - 1/21/2003

Billie, Glen and John are right. In the end, people have to get over it, he's there now and there's no going back.


Gus Moner - 1/21/2003

Well said.


Gus Moner - 1/21/2003

LB’s comment that “after a 20th Century in which Communists murdered roughly 100 million people in China, The Soviet Union, Vietnam, Cambodia, Eastern Europe, Africa, and Latin America, it's incredible that some people can't abide an anti-Communist statement without resorting to the charge of "red-baiting" or "McCarthyism" struck me at first, but in the end it didn’t make sense to me.

I cannot buy the comparison of 100,000,000 dead, even if it were right, to some ageing leftist mobilising for peace here. Sorry, but it seems people are indeed singling out old leftists in current politics to discredit these movements. That is wrong. No matter how many Mao killed. The Popes have been responsible for quite an uncountable number of millions themselves, but you wouldn’t stop going to a demonstration sponsored by them or stop practicing Catholicism for it anymore than for the errant paedophiles in the Church today. They are not demonstrating for the return of Stalin or his methods, last I saw and heard.

Another comment that ”even if Communism were indeed dead and gone, its legacy of moral atrocity remains. Naziism is no longer a threat, yet we rightly condemn skinheads who march under the swastika”.

The difference here is that leftists do not advocate those methods, nor make apologies for it. The Nazi Skin Heads want to bring that madness back. The KKK want to perpetuate theirs. It’s day and night, sir or madam.

Well, people have a right to their political opinions and to express them. I anyhow doubt the KKK or the Nazis could actually gather 50,000 to demonstrate for or against anything. Then again, in today’s climate……


AMac - 1/21/2003

Kahlil points out that he knows almost nothing about ANSWER, but then defends his choice to attend their rally by inventing a story about others' twisted logic.

Readers may want to read this exposition of why Kahlil's reasoning is so odious:
http://letterfromgotham.blogspot.com/2003_01_01_letterfromgotham_archive.html

Or ask yourself: would you attend a KKK-sponsored rally for ANY cause? Of course not. How's snuggling with Stalinists any different?

No sale, cowboy.


Gus Moner - 1/21/2003

For the sake of your intervention, let’s use that figure, some 3,000. How does that change anything I said? Is that a suitable number of dead? The fact is that the dead have families, and friends, and the suffering is wide-ranging . Ask the families of the victims of the WTC. If you ant to believe there were few deaths, so be it. I have to agree that figures are scantly documented and speculative, even in these counts you offer.

Perhaps I did not express myself well or fully regarding the leadership of demonstrations. There are infinitely more good, honest, concerned, US citizens from all walks of life involved. Don’t single out a few to discredit the lot.

Finally, no I would not go to a KKK food drive, I’d go to another. As so many peace marchers did. They went not for the demonstration's leaders, but rather for the cause. Get it?


Gus Moner - 1/21/2003

>>Of course, the return of refugees to Afghanistan since the overthrow of the Taliban has been perhaps the largest voluntary return in history, so yes, there is hope. Surely, Gus, you do not seriously doubt that the situation of the Afghan people today is vastly improved over what it was on September 10, 2001, do you?

People in Afghanistan live today as they have throughout all periods of their history, in their clans, following their social norms, laws and customs. That was my point, that all the propaganda we heard was just that. They are coming home, thankfully for them, yes. However, their situation is no better nor will it contain any of the freedoms and democracy so gratuitously promised us. So, no, their situation is better only because they are home. There is a long way before the situation improves in their terms, much less to the extent the government said.

>>As for the gas pipeline deal, it seems that all you can do is make a vague reference to alleged business interests because you have no facts to support even the most far-fetched conspiracy theory.

There is no vague reference. It is a fact Unocal signed the deal, it was, of course buried in the news. Check any archive. I am making up nothing, nor advocating any ‘conspiracy’. It’s just a happy coincidence.

>> First, as Radosh points out, it has been admirably responsible leftists, such as David Corn and others, who have been among those most critical of the cuddly "old leftists" that you refer to.

Well, just who is in charge of labelling the responsible lefties? I knew of no such committee yet to certify an acceptable leftist. The world really moves too fast for me.

>> Second, Gus, doesn't it make you the least bit uncomfortable that the demonstrations this past weekend were organized by supporters and apologists for Slobodon Milosevic and for a brutal, militaristic North Korean dictatorship that, among other things, has systematically starved to death approximately 10% of its own people in the past few years?

Well, proof please. I know many people who were organised by people considered as responsible members of their communities. I think you are off base here. No one ‘supports’ N Korea, nor Saddam’s Iraq. That’s different from supporting for attacking them, without strong evidence of danger. Or unilaterally, in a ‘coalition of willing nations’ or any other way outside established international law.


Steve - 1/21/2003

...NAMBLA (the pro-child molestation group) organized it?

Would conservatives attend a pro-life or pro-gun rally if it was organized by the Ku Klux Klan or the Aryan Nation?

That's what this site (and many others) is bothered about. Why couldn't the anti-war crowd put together a demonstration without using it's most despicable elements (Stalinists and pro Kim Jong-Il radicals) to organize it?


Cowboy Kahlil - 1/21/2003

Participating in an anti-war march is not something I do to 'go along with the crowd.' I don't do it in sympathy with the every word miked to the crowd by a variety of speakers. I know almost nothing about ANSWER, but I presume it does not include any repressive Soviet or Chinese Communist party officials.

I don't do it to denounce capitalism or the USA. I don't do it with treasonous intent. I don't do it out of pacifism.

I choose to march because I am opposed to this war, based on all we've been told about it. I do it in opposition to the concept of the new pre-emption doctrine, which flies in the face of what I believe to be American principles, that we commit troops to defend us and our allies. I do it because I believe Saddaam Hussein has been contained successfully for over a decade and poses no nearterm threat to us or his neighbors.

Under the twisted logic that all anti-war protestors are supporters of or dupes of the Commies, I could make other guilt-by-association claims, showing how we must also be dupes of conservatives and racists. And I do precisely that on my blog today: http://reachm.crimsonblog.com/">ReachM.


Vaginara - 1/21/2003

This entire article is rubbish, written from a straight white male phalocentric perspective!

The people of color and womyn of the world reject this rationalistic approach to the world that fetishizes facts over feelings. We know why we protested, and one day this entire system will come crashing down because of it!


LB - 1/21/2003

WizardBill ought to learn to spell at a ninth-grade level before he charges others with 'intellectual ineptitude.'


LB - 1/21/2003

After a 20th Century in which Communists murdered roughly 100 million people in China, The Soviet Union, Vietnam, Cambodia, Eastern Europe, Africa, and Latin America, it's incredible that some people can't abide an anti-Communist statement without resorting to the charge of "red-baiting" or "McCarthyism."

Mr. Moner writes, "Why people remain obsessed with the left or commies as a mortal threat in this day and age is beyond me," as though the world were no longer threatened by Communist countries (remember China? North Korea?). Even if Communism were indeed dead and gone, its legacy of moral atrocity remains. Naziism is no longer a threat, yet we rightly condemn skinheads who march under the swastika. We're not afraid Nazi punks will take over the country, we're just disgusted by their support of an evil ideology. Likewise the Klan and other hate groups. Would Mr. Moner say "Why people remain obsessed with Nazis or Klansmen is beyond me?" Would he say it if the Nazis and the Klan had just organized a 50,000 person rally in Washington?


Jim Roberts-Miller - 1/21/2003

>As for the casualties being low in Afghanistan, officially >there have been over 5,000 dead, mostly civilians from >precision bombing and pin-point missile accuracy.

First off, there no "official" numbers, at least as we would normally understand the term. Not even Marc Herold, probably the most famous of those providing high values of casualty figures, claims this number, as you can see here:

http://www.cursor.org/stories/noncounters.htm

You can also see other, much lower estimates. Herold's methods of course, have been attacked, and he has defended them, and there's no need to go into that here. The 5000 dead figure, appears to have as its source a column by (IIRC) John Pilger, and no where in his article did he indicate where he got that figure.

As for the sponsorship of the protests, I think it does have some bearing on the matter. Would you support a food drive organized by the Ku Klux Klan?


Billie Nereson - 1/21/2003

This continual hand-wringing about Florida is a liberal farce. Even the recounts did not account for the 1400 overseas votes that were eliminated by the Gore lawyers. These 1400 votes have been conveniently overlooked and would have netted Bush another 400 votes. Read Bill Salmon's book on the Florida election. Also Judge Posner's. (And of course the unfootnoted work of Bugliosi and Michael Moore's book, Stupid White Men for a truly balanced view)


John D'oh - 1/21/2003

> In fact, Gore did win.

Maybe in your universe. Here, the Electoral College decided differently. Get over it.


Glen - 1/21/2003

Tom, Theresa the Trickster was a Democrat. Maybe if the Democrat controlled counties would have employed Republicans to run the voting, these errors of incompetence would have been reduced or eliminated.


Tom Kellum - 1/21/2003

You asked for a scenario under which Gore would have won. There are several. If all of the votes had been counted; he would won. If all of those eligible to vote, had been allowed to exercise their franchise, he would have won. If all of votes of those who intended to vote for Gore had been counted for Gore, he would have won. If Teresa La Pore's incompetence (or, just as likely, her venality) had not been available to help do her part in tricking voters into voting for someone other than whom they intended to vote for, Gore would have won.

In fact, Gore did win. But, the criminals on the Supreme Court installed the military deserting, cocaine abusing, alcoholic illerate, George W. Bunnypants. And that makes you feel good?


Al Czervikjr - 1/21/2003

>>So, bemoan the casualties, the rubble and the bereaved. But there is hope. The gas pipeline deal is now signed, profits and business will rise as we develop the pipeline to India.

Of course, the return of refugees to Afghanistan since the overthrow of the Taliban has been perhaps the largest voluntary return in history, so yes, there is hope. Surely, Gus, you do not seriously doubt that the situation of the Afghan people today is vastly improved over what it was on September 10, 2001, do you?

As for the gas pipeline deal, it seems that all you can do is make a vague reference to alleged business interests because you have no facts to support even the most far-fetched conspiracy theory.

Also, before you go counting the profits from the deal, consider this: if you were India, would you want to rely on a gas pipeline that runs through Afghanistan and Pakistan?

>>Just one question, why cannot the old leftists participate in new organisations or advocate for current issues like other US citizens without being reviled by zombie Republicans and fellow travellers?

First, as Radosh points out, it has been admirably responsible leftists, such as David Corn and others, who have been among those most critical of the cuddly "old leftists" that you refer to.

Second, Gus, doesn't it make you the least bit uncomfortable that the demonstrations this past weekend were organized by supporters and apologists for Slobodon Milosevic and for a brutal, militaristic North Korean dictatorship that, among other things, has systematically starved to death approximately 10% of its own people in the past few years?


Al Czervikjr - 1/21/2003

Mr. Kellum, I am amazed at how you manage to repeatedly work your delusions regarding the 2000 election into your comments, regardless of whether they have any relevance whatsoever to the particular article at issue. Once again, however, you manage to avoid any actual facts to support your claims.

>>the Republicans used Hessian-type protesters to stop the vote count down there in Miami.

The Democratic elections commissioner in Dade has expressly denied that the Republicans protesting the apparent attempt to have votes counted outside of public view had anything to do with the decision to stop the recount. I guess you know more about the situation than he does, right?

Also, you still have not disputed the fact that the recounts since the election demonstrate that Bush would have won if all of Dade County (and not just a more Democratic-leaning half of the County)had been counted.

>>No more ugly stories in our fabled "liberal" media about how the election was hijacked by a group of right-wing thugs and Uncle Clarence and The Boys (plus Sandy).

I guess you believe that the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Boston Globe and the LA Times are all bastions of conservativism?

As for the Supreme Court, SEVEN justices, including Souter and Breyer, held that the recount ordered by the FL S.Ct. was unconstitutional. I guess you include Souter and Breyer as two of "The Boys"?

Moreover, as the media recounts demonstrate, Bush would have won a statewide recount under just about any possibler scenario. Please identify even one scenario under which Gore would have won in a fair statewide recount of the votes.




Gus Moner - 1/21/2003

This was a rather odd article Mr. Radosh has clumped together. I found it rather a re-hash, both weak and base. Why people remain obsessed with the left or commies as a mortal threat in this day and age is beyond me, but I would venture that red-baiters and bashers are evidencing withdrawal symptoms with this barrage of ‘everything we dislike hides the left’, fear mongering as if the left were an advancing plague. For starters, wake up. The game is up. It’s not about south paws and right-handers, it’s now good vs. evil, and we all know who’s who. It’s a Brave new World.
As for the casualties being low in Afghanistan, officially there have been over 5,000 dead, mostly civilians from precision bombing and pin-point missile accuracy. That few US soldiers perished is a tribute to their timing; managing to go in everywhere in Afghanistan just after the Northern Alliance had cleared out the area. We haven’t a clue how many casualties resulted from the Northern Alliance’s advance. So, bemoan the casualties, the rubble and the bereaved. But there is hope. The gas pipeline deal is now signed, profits and business will rise as we develop the pipeline to India. Now we’re going after some deposits and to get the guy who tried to kill someone’s dad.
Just one question, why cannot the old leftists participate in new organisations or advocate for current issues like other US citizens without being reviled by zombie Republicans and fellow travellers? Let then enjoy their third age in peace. I know it’s a hard concept to get behind, peace. When will you ever learn?


Tom Kellum - 1/21/2003

What is it with those people. Don't those communist fools know that they are contributing to a decline in the consumption ethic whenever they attend a peace rally, instead of attending to shopping?

They could learn a thing or two about achieving peace in our time, by observing the way the Republicans used Hessian-type protesters to stop the vote count down there in Miami. They flew those folks in, bussed over to where the votes were being counted, and turned 'em loose to do what they knew they were supposed to do. Then, when it was all over, they give each one of 'em a free roach clip and put 'em back on the plane home.

Pretty soon, there WAS peace in the land. No more ugly stories in our fabled "liberal" media about how the election was hijacked by a group of right-wing thugs and Uncle Clarence and The Boys (plus Sandy).

Sometimes, it takes a bunch of kakhi-pants thugs to run a real Peace movement in this republic.


WizardBill - 1/20/2003

If the democratic party were to organize a protest in opposition to the war on iraq, george bush, etc. then i would be there in a heart-beat, but they aren't against these things, few a very few exceptions, their for them.

p.s. I think your publication of this anti-war screede was at best a sign of intellectual ineptitude on your own part. You should do better or give up blogging...