Custom Search

Wednesday, February 21, 2007

Violent Peace Activists--- Irony in its finest form

Last night I ran across an article that actually gave me a fit of the giggles....ever had those? Where you start laughing and even though it isn't that funny, you cannot seem to stop?

A Fredericksburg man was arrested Saturday on charges he assaulted three strangers at their home during a dispute over politics, police said.

According to a Fredericksburg police report, the suspect went to a home in the 900 block of Marye Street about 5:30 p.m. after finding one of the resident's name on a Republican Web site.

The resident and his two roommates engaged in a discussion with the suspect, though none of them had ever met or had contact with him before.

The argument got heated and the suspect learned that the young residents had not enlisted in the military and "put their all" behind the Republican-led war effort in Iraq, police spokeswoman Natatia Bledsoe said.

The suspect refused to leave the home after repeatedly being asked to do so, police said. The three roommates were hit multiple times each as they attempted to get the suspect out of the door, authorities said.

The suspect continued to be aggressive and disorderly even after a city police officer arrived, the report states.

Andrew Stone, 23, was charged with three counts of assault and battery. A magistrate released Stone on his own recognizance and he was ordered to have no further contact with the victims.

I was chuckling at this point....because, obviously this Stone guy doesn't understand the concept of a "volunteer" military.

What sent me into fits of laughter was this:

It was not clear in the report what political agenda Stone was supporting.

ummmmmm, DUH!!!!!!!

How about three guesses and the first two don't count!!!

This is not new by any means, anti-war, pro-"peace" activists have a history of violence dating back to, at least, the Vietnam war.

1968 Anti War Protest turns violent:

More than 200 people have been arrested after thousands of demonstrators clashed in an anti-Vietnam war protest outside the United States embassy in London.


The embassy was surrounded by hundreds of police. They stood shoulder to shoulder to cordon off the part of the square closest to the embassy.

Tensions rose as the crowd refused to back off and mounted officers rode at the demonstrators.

The protesters broke through the police ranks onto the lawn of the embassy, tearing up the plastic fence and uprooting parts of a hedge.

During a protracted battle, stones, earth, firecrackers and smoke bombs were thrown.

One officer was treated for a reported serious spinal injury, another for a neck injury.

One officer had his hat knocked off and was struck continuously on the back of the head with a stick from a banner as he clung, head down, to his horse's neck.

Yes..... peaceful people huh?

That is one example of dozens that can be found using a search engine...

More recent events that show how peaceful these anti-war activists and protesters still are.

In 2003:

( - Two generations of Americans will collide in Washington, D.C., on Saturday when a coalition of Vietnam veterans counter-protests thousands of anti-war protesters, many of whom were born years after Saigon fell to the Communists in 1975. Almost three decades later, the Vietnam veterans want to ensure America's military avoids another unfinished war.

But even as these veterans prepare for their counter demonstration, an official with one veterans group said his organization has been receiving e-mail threats of violence by people identifying themselves as anti-war and peace activists.

March of 2003:

NEW YORK — Anti-war protesters on Friday continued to live up to their promises to ramp up demonstrations against the U.S.-led "shock and awe" campaign.

Some experts said the demonstrations could compromise homeland security, however, particularly when the nation was on high alert.

"If it takes 30 to 40 police officers to keep order at a demonstration and arrest people for civil disobedience ... they're not out on the street looking for the bad guys," David Cid, a former FBI counterterrorism expert and current president of the Salus International security firm, told

"As we escalate this threat level, the public safety response is really to have a larger police presence on the street," Cid added. "Anything that takes away person-hours from that effort certainly can be problematic."

When the bombs started falling in Baghdad Wednesday night, anti-war leaders launched their own next phase of attack, which continued into Friday.

About 80 to 100 demonstrators were arrested in San Francisco Friday, where the most raucous demonstrations have taken place. Fourteen hundred people were arrested Thursday.

Protesters stalled firefighters trying to respond to emergencies. Firefighters and police used bolt cutters on protesters who had locked their arms together in metal sleeves.

One protester reportedly died after falling from the Golden Gate Bridge. Police are investigating it as a suicide.

"This is the largest number of arrests we've made in one day and the largest demonstration in terms of disruption that I've seen," Assistant Police Chief Alex Fagan Sr., a 30-year department veteran, told the San Francisco Chronicle.

Roughly 1,500 of the police department's 2,300 officers were on street duty, the Chronicle reported, costing the city $500,000 in police overtime.

Often, police in riot gear would encircle the demonstrators, only to find themselves encircled.

"We're in a totally reactive mode," Deputy Chief Rick Bruce, head of the Police Department's special operations bureau, told the Chronicle. "We just respond to illegal activity. It's tough. They are moving faster than us."

Protesters blocked intersections, scuffled with police, broke windows and heaved newspaper racks and debris into streets. Some hurled rocks at commuter trains, briefly halting service at a station across the Bay in Oakland.

"We went from what I would call legal protests to absolute anarchy," said Fagan.

"I must express my frustration at the tactics of some protesters," Mayor Willie Brown said in a statement Thursday night, "who have chosen to specifically try to disrupt this city, rather than gather peacefully to voice their desire for peace, at the expense of the day-to-day lives of ordinary San Franciscans — and at great cost to the city."

Finish reading that article to see more examples of how "peaceful" these lunatics are.

The most recent spray painting of the capital building shows us once again that many of these anti-war protesters are nothing more than criminals using the war as an excuse to vandalize and break the law. (Yes, I said CRIMINALS, vandalism IS a crime)

Anti-war protesters were allowed to spray paint on part of the west front steps of the United States Capitol building after police were ordered to break their security line by their leadership, two sources told The Hill.

According to the sources, police officers were livid when they were told to fall back by U.S. Capitol Police (USCP) Chief Phillip Morse andDeputy Chief Daniel Nichols. "They were the commanders on the scene," one source said, who requested anonymity. "It was disgusting."

After police ceded the stairs, located on the lower west front of the Capitol, the building was locked down, the source added.

A second source who witnessed the incident said that the police had the crowd stopped at Third Street, but were told to bring the police line in front of the Capitol.

Approximately 300 protesters were allowed to take the steps and began to spray paint "anarchist symbols" and phrase such as "Our capitol building" and "you can’t stop us" around the area, the source said.

Which brings us to our Vietnam war veterans and other former and active military men and women along with their supporters to create their own movement called Gathering of the Eagles to stand guard at the Vietnam Memorial Wall to protect it from these thugs that call themselves anti-war, pro-peace protesters.

Leftist activists who march to the Pentagon next month will discover that their path won't be as clear as it has been in the past.

The group, led by Cindy Sheehan, Jane Fonda, Ramsey Clark and their ilk, plan to gather March 17 at the Vietnam Memorial Wall to begin a march to protest America's involvement in the Iraq war. The date marks the fourth anniversary of the war's beginning.

This time, however, protestors will see objectors if they spit on Iraqi veterans again, or throw paint on a war memorial. This time, they will encounter a buzz saw of Vietnam veterans and supporters who will gather to protect the Wall, and show their support for U.S. troops. The counter-protestors are calling themselves the Gathering of Eagles.

I said yesterday that the tides a turnin' and after I wrote that, a new poll brought to us from Outside the Beltway, shows more to make my point.

(Hat Tip to OTB) Contrary to the rhetoric we hear from the left and our Democratic politicians, the new polls and surveys show that "the majority" of American people understand that we must succeed in Iraq.

Here are some pretty interesting numbers, though, given those and other indications** that the survey isn’t biased toward President Bush:

* 57% believe “The Iraq War is a key part of the global war on terrorism.”

* 57% “support finishing the job in Iraq, that is, keeping the troops there until the Iraqi government can maintain control and provide security for its people.

* 50% want our troops should stay and “do whatever it takes to restore order until the Iraqis can govern and provide security to their country” while only 17% favor immediate withdrawal.

* 56% believe “Even if they have concerns about his war policies, Americans should stand behind the President in Iraq because we are at war.”

* 53% believe “The Democrats are going too far, too fast in pressing the President to withdraw the troops from Iraq.”

Guess congress and the Senate didn't move quick enough to force defeat down America's throat.

This matches another poll we quoted recently from Investors Business Daily.

More from the most recent poll is explained from the New York Post.

February 21, 2007 -- In a dramatic finding, a new poll shows a solid majority of Americans still wants to win the war in Iraq - and keep U.S. troops there until the Baghdad government can take over.

Strong majorities also say victory is vital to the War on Terror and that Americans should support President Bush even if they have concerns about the way the war is being handled, according to the survey conducted by Public Opinion Strategies.

The poll found that 57 percent of Americans supported "finishing the job in Iraq" - keeping U.S. troops there until the Iraqis can provide security on their own. Forty-one percent disagreed.

By 53 percent to 43 percent they also believe victory in Iraq over the insurgents is still possible.

Despite last November's electoral victories by anti-war Democrats, the survey found little support among voters for a quick pullout of U.S. forces.

Only 25 percent of those surveyed agreed with the statement, "I don't really care what happens in Iraq after the U.S. leaves, I just want the troops brought home." Seventy-four percent disagreed.

Those are large numbers and the more congress and the senate come out in any support for the Murtha Slow Bleed plan, the more the Democrat will see their base evaporating.... no one wants to back a loser and they especially do not want to back anyone that wishes to deliberately lose just to win some political points for their next election.

I am going to leave you with some words from one of our active duty soldiers in Iraq via Michael Yon:

When I remember the scenes we all saw on September 11th, 2001, I am reminded that I am still one pissed off American and Texan. This war is just, and I stand steadfast behind it and our President. And I will remain in the Army fighting this war until our President tells me to stop, or I get too old to continue. We need our nation’s support and prayers, not criticism, second guessing, and Monday morning quarterbacking.

Please go read this brave soldiers words, I have shown simply a small excerpt here but his full statement is moving and says that the only way we can lose is if our Democratic politicians force us into defeat.