First Successful Protest at RNC (Photos)

[BrooklynRider]

Philadelphia ACT-UP - stripped down on 8th Ave and 33rd Street to Welcome delegates (and were promptly arrested).

Photos in link...

http://nyc.indymedia.org/newswire/display/103375/index.php

Stay tuned to www.nyc.indymedia.org for real-time independent coverage of protest events from the streets. This is the news corporate media won't show.

[slinkerwink]

1. that was just a fucking stupid protest

[BrooklynRider]

3. And what exact ACTION have you taken? They have guts.

[slinkerwink]

5. I'm going to march in the United for Peace protest

instead of stupidly stripping my clothes off. The average American will NOT relate to a bunch of naked protesters. But the average American will relate to normally dressed people in a mass protest.

[Name removed]

16. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[slinkerwink]

24. ha!

The average American voter will NOT relate to a bunch of crazy naked hippies, but they will relate to a huge number of normally dressed people walking down the West Side. You have to think about how you present yourself to the media and you don't want the media to paint your cause as a "crazy anti-bush hatred" sort of cause.

I'm planning to dress up conservatively and have factual signs attacking the Bush administration policies. If there's a photo of me, it will come off better to the newspaper reader/tv watcher than a photo of stupid naked hippies.

[Name removed]

36. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

38. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

58. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[slinkerwink]

64. *snicker*

This is the first time I've been called a fascist. I have marched in anti-war protests, and I know what the image is needed to project our cause to the American voter, and this one won't do it. It is not effective at all.

[BrooklynRider]

73. Your comments are totally antithetical to ANY protest movement.

If you've been an anti-war protestor, then appreciate the support any protestor seeks and needs to convey their message. You bash every other protest - while shamelessly promoting your own "legal" protest. The protests against this Convention aren't only about the War. You're so worried about Karl Rove, the media, and the "average" voter. How about just having convictions about the issues and supporting others that share those views. This protest hurt no one, was bold in its execution, and was over the top in tactics. As the FIRST protest, it was just what this convention needs - proof positive that people aren't going to buy the fear, the intimidation or the "rules" of engagement.

In each thread you shamelessly and with great judgement of others, promote your event. You are giving the UFJP march a very ugly face.

[JustCarbon]

66. DUDE

Calm yourself. She's allowed to have her opinions. Why are you picking a fight?

[DS1]

74. I think I'm in love

:eyes:

[JustCarbon]

49. ...

holy shit man, chill out

just as your entitled to your opinion, he's entitled to his


It's fine to debate but you're attacking pretty blatantly. I don't think you need to call him a hypocrite or a fascist. You're being a hypocrite by judging him based on HIS ideals. Learn to debate.

[slinkerwink]

54. I'm a she

;-)

[JustCarbon]

60. sorry

my bad :)

[slinkerwink]

65. it's ok

:-)

[KurtNYC]

41. You can have 1000 mild marches, they will show only the wild stuff

This is from Outfoxed; Korb was a video editor for cable news:

Korb said he received orders to "make protesters look stupid and use footage of small crowds where the protesters look like pot-smoking liberals."

Not sure why you felt you needed to post the same point about 6 times?

[Isere]

72. You are absolutely correct!

I weathered the dreadful days of the 60s and 70s protests. It was ugly.
Bushit and his gang are dying for a replay so they can point to all of the "freaks" (that will be their word, not mine!) and say that John Kerry is aligned with such folks.

Middle America does not relate to nose rings and purple hair. And everyone knows that the media will focus on the most outrageous looking protestors.

So, yes, please do protest! If I didn't live 3000 miles away, I'd go too. But I'd wear my most conservative suit. That conveys the visual message that dull, ordinary, average Americans are against Bush. Wouldn't that be a more powerful message? I think so.

[Dover]

76. Yeah.......they should have at least worn a tie..

I wonder what color and style matches NAKED? LOL! Decisions, decisions...

[jdj]

79. The problem is

that if there are 10 "crazy naked hippies" in a group of one thousand normally dressed dumpy unspectacular over the hill folks, who do you think will get their picture in the paper?

The media will distort no matter what.

I think alot of people in the "fly-over" states have no idea what is going to happen next week. And this may get their attention and wake them up for more to come.

I can't criticize ACT-UP, and I have personally been pissed at them when they held up the 93 gay pride march by holding a die-in in front of the white house and about gave half of us heatstroke.

But they are a righteous group of people, and I admire their committment.

[henslee]

105. Exactly. Measured tactics are most effective. Shock and awe not neccesary.

In a way, thats why i had a problem with the Margaret Cho's moveon.org spot w/gay couples & families. What purpose does it have? 999.9% gays are already voting against *. All the spot does is alienate poss. undecideds. I mean lets take a page from Rove's book. Look how they are keeping the radical right the hell away from pubic view this week... They are only parading their moderates. We must do the same!

[Warren DeMontague]

122. "hippies"

There's one guy there who looks like he has long hair. How you get that those people are "stupid naked hippies" is beyond me.

As to how that word became a slur, particularly in some so-called "progressive" circles, well, it's also beyond me. A lot of "hippies" are pulling an awful lot of weight for our team in this election, snotty insults and generalizations notwithstanding.

[NashVegas]

37. They Are Playing Straight Into Rove's Hands

..

[jdj]

85. I don't sink so.

People like Rove are called "spin-meisters" for a reason.

They spin ANYTHING AND EVERYTHING that comes their way, because they work for a movement that is not just and has no moral center, so spin is all they have.

If law-abiding citizens protest quietly, I am totally unconvinced the cops will not pick fights, break laws, assault and arrest innocent people and then call them anarchists.

You have to act your conscience and you can't worry about people like Rove and Hughes, besides anytime you start being a control freak back to folks like these, you violate the very principles you are standin for in the first place, which begin with the first amendment.

[Name removed]

108. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[otohara]

111. My Guess Your Posts....Not So Thoughtful

don't take it personally - unless you're a freeper

[Dickie Flatt]

13. Yeah, they have guts

I know I wouldnt strip in the middle of NYC. But what the hell is the point? People will laugh at them and move on. It accomplishes nothing; it's not an effective protest.

[Dickie Flatt]

46. Anyone can take action; whether it's effective is another question

AND THIS IS NOT. If they want to fight AIDS, do something real. Actively support, and I mean volunteering and fundraising not dumbass stunts, politicians who share your views. Donate your time and your money to those actively working to fight AIDS.

BUT DO NOT BLOCK TRAFFIC AND STRIP. How much more funding for AIDS will this cause? NONE. How many politicians, who support their cause, will this help elect? NONE. Because this is STUPID. ACT UP's clowns are more interested in making the news than in doing some good for the world. They're from the same camp as PETA, the 'any publicity is good publicity' mindset. IT'S NOT. This is bad publicity. Horrible. In fact, it may drive people AWAY from their message, because they see these people as a bunch of crazies, and nobody wants to associate with crazies.

I cannot believe we have to start our protests off with this horseshit.

[freetobegay]

69. How old are you?

Do you remember the fight for AIDS when it first started? If it had not been for the "crazies" it would have never gotten off the ground!

I can't believe what some people will post here!

Thank God back then we had queer nation & act up.

[BrooklynRider]

83. Thank you.

My reaction was visceral to the attacks on the protestors - but you said it succinctly (and have apparently been paying attention for the last 20 years). Cheers!

[BrooklynRider]

78. So the only appropriate protest is Anti-War - following your logic.

There's such a stream of "sex is bad" running through this thread. Many here seem to think the "naked body" aspect of this protest is the most offensive thing imaginable. Sex = Dirty Naked Body = Embarrasing. So, it is Anti-War Puritans marching.

[jdj]

116. Them's fightin words.

there was NO FUNDING FOR AIDS. Reagan didn't mention it for six years, after 40,000 were dead.

As long as the protest doesn't end up like the French Revolution, in which case it's a revolution, not a protest, then okay.

I don't like anarchist tactics, but I see nothing wrong with baring booty for the greater good.

[jdj]

82. And I have never seen such a nice ass bared for such a good cause.

See the third pic in the link.

Bless this young woman for using it for the betterment of society.

[Nightjock]

4. I'm in favor of any non violent protest against Bush

[slinkerwink]

7. it was a stupid protest that makes us look like crazy naked liberals

[DarkPhenyx]

15. What's wrong with crazy naked Liberals?

The world would be much better off if we had more of them...IMHO.

[slinkerwink]

17. because they turn off the average american voter

and just makes our protest look stupid.

[DarkPhenyx]

22. The average protester turns off the average voter.

Most protests also look pretty stupid from the outside. Such is life in teh big city sweetheart.

[slinkerwink]

26. not true.

The average protester are people like the people who marched in the anti-war protests with their families.

[DarkPhenyx]

50. But sadly that isn't how they are viewed.

which of course you are going to say is not true. So since, as you have demonstrated in the past, you won't listen to a reasoned discussion I bid you good day.

[name not needed]

129. But that is not how they are portrayed.

The "liberal" media isn't exaclty willing to show protests for what they really are, but rather as exhibitionist freakshows. No matter what you do, they will spin it.

[Warren DeMontague]

132. Yeah, and a fat lot of good it did.

I say that as someone who marked in the anti-war protests. With my family. (And with clothes on, too, I might add)

Arguing that a few naked butts on tv might alienate one or two swing voters is reasonable, but it won't prevent it from happening.

Arguing that your "dignified, responsible" protest is going to change any swing voter's mind in the other direction, I think, is major self-delusion.

[blondeatlast]

134. I'm about as boring a middle-class mom as you can get, and if I could,

I'd be protesting too.

There'd be a whale of a lot of middle American, middle class moms who would see me there and think, "if she's pissed, amybe she's onto something."

We need to win the swing voters.

That's street theater. It won't get us anywhere.

[BrooklynRider]

25. Fuck the average American voters. They watch Fox News.

[slinkerwink]

27. they also watch CNN and MSNBC and ABC and NBC

[Name removed]

48. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[BrooklynRider]

87. It proves I am protesting for ME and MY views - not "Joe Voter".

If anyone is protesting other than to exercise their right to express themselves and their point of view, it's not an honest protest. Going to a big march in hopes that the "average voter" is going to be somehow moved by this display rather than to simply be heard and counted is just chasing rainbows.

The protests are here and now because, I believe, we are protesting Republicans as the dominant force in Congress and specfically this president's policies. If the true intent is to affect "average voters", have a march on a weekend wen nothing is going on. The ideals you're shooting for are lofty but wholly unattainable.

[jdj]

92. Let's limit the freedom of expression of marchers who are marching

for the constitutional principles this country was founded on, one of which is freedom of expression...WTF???

I think people are estimating the effect this could have on young voters especially.

The picture of the woman rapelling down onto the balcony brought tears to my eyes...it is so inspiring... if she can do this, then I can put a lousy bumper sticker on my car.

[coalition_unwilling]

20. Yossarian got naked in a tree

Not that it did him any good with his dilemma(s).

[jdj]

86. We're not the ones raping naked iraqi children

or sicking (sic?) dogs on them

How can this turn people off more than Abu Ghraib

[RetroLounge]

96. crazy naked liberals

and your problem with crazy naked liberals is what?

RL

[slinkerwink]

141. it's not effective and turns off voters

[Nordic]

8. Great. Guess what the media's gonna show as an example of "protest?"

naked people of course.

Thanks, folks!

[jdj]

94. Get over it. As a veteran of gay pride marches I can tell you

you can have (and we did) a million average joe and jill queers and they will show only the drag queens and radical faeries.

Not to mention NAMBLA, who are booed and despised at any gay pride march.

[freetobegay]

10. There is not stupid protest

The only studidity is from the ones that would knock any type of protest of Bush.

[slinkerwink]

14. I wouldn't knock a legal protest like the United for Peace protest

which I am going to march in, but I am against a stupid protest that features naked people. It does our cause no service at all.

[WhereIsMyFreedom]

23. And when Bush makes all protests illegal

You'll sit quietly at home?

[slinkerwink]

28. ha, no

[freetobegay]

29. There is no such thing as a legal protest in America right now

Thanks to the Bush cabal.

[slinkerwink]

35. there is----there's the United for Peace legal protest

[BrooklynRider]

40. You've already surrendered. Why don't you just stay home!

[slinkerwink]

42. no, because I'll be marching in the legal protest

[Name removed]

47. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[slinkerwink]

51. look at post #46

[freetobegay]

71. See post #69

No pun intended.

[freetobegay]

61. BrooklynRider

That was not called for! I think you should apologize.

[Borgnine]

77. Christ dude!

Mellow out! There's no need for ridiculous personal attacks, especially when she has very valid points about the most effective ways to protest.

[thebigidea]

97. so where's your naked protest? Or is it just TALK?

You should stop all this posturing and start posing... show off that non-fascist body and bask in the popular acclaim.

Because if you don't, you're just a brownshirt that gives protest a bad name. Or something to that effect.

[freetobegay]

44. Are you speaking of the free speech zones?

The ones that are no where near where Bush will be? Like I said all legal protest have ceased to exist in America.

[slinkerwink]

59. the United for Peace march is marching past the Madison Square Garden

where the RNC convention is being held.

[jdj]

106. Hmmm....pornography is a multi-billion dollar industry

Flynt, Guccione, Hefner...all millionaires.

Yet, I'm sure it's not the nakedness that gets attention, just the quality of the articles.

By the way, Flynt's new book "Sex,Lies, and Politics is righteous as hell, it goes way above and beyond anything I expected, to the point I thought it might be ghost-written by Greg Palast, last night I was comparing passages with "Best Democracy" just to see. He uses all the internet lingo DUers use, but the book is written for people who don't have that much knowlege of politics. It is a five-star read, to say the least.

[RodneyCK2]

21. I agree. If you have ever marched on Washington...

like I have a number of times, you quickly realize that the media will focus only on the scandalous and most outrageous protesters, sometimes at the cost of the point of the protest.

I think this is great!!! You watch, soon, because of their tactics, this will we shown on every news station, leaving normal protesters ignored by the media (as they would be anyways). A point is a point, no matter how it calls for attention.

[Renew Deal]

70. They will be out of prison in time for Sunday.

[freemarketer]

91. I agree 100%. Same thing happened in the anti-war protests I went

to before the invasion. Every one I went to there were be mostly normal people of various ages and persuasions, but there was also the abberant life forms-dirty, naked, rank, protesting such things as killing owls in Oregon. These people's protests, while may be legitmimate detracted from the main message of ending the war.

I don't think Kerry has a chance in hell now and think he will not only lose but be beaten by huge numbers. The type of protestors shown above will be one of the reasons for Kerry's loss, albeit a small one.

[Renew Deal]

95. What's the big reason why Kerry loses?

[otohara]

110. I Know What You Mean So....European!!!

I LOVE IT!!!

[Feanorcurufinwe]

137. They don't call themselves ACT UP for nuthin'

they've always acted up and I don't think they'll stop.

[Nightjock]

2. They are going to regret politicizing 9-11

[Blue_Tires]

6. can we get some frontal shots??

to better judge the *strength* of their passions??

[TNOE]

9. Ewwwwww

you SURE you'd like to see that? At least one left a ripped t-shirt on - whew.

[DarkPhenyx]

11. Damn skippy!

Just like the media giving us only half the story. I swear!

:)

[Ducks In A Row]

12. this just makes us look like freaks

hope the rest of the protests have a few more brains behind them

[Name removed]

19. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[slinkerwink]

34. we are being realistic because we know that the media focuses

on crazy naked protesters like this bunch, and we don't want that to happen. We want the media to focus on families marching in the streets against bush.

[BrooklynRider]

43. Why cater to corporate media - they supported Bush's coronation.

[gardenista]

63. Interesting sig line. I'm sure Martin would be all over this shit.

[Dickie Flatt]

67. Are you interested in stunts? Or in actual change?

I suspect it's the first. You cannot oppose every pillar of society -- our politicians, our media, our police, etc. -- and expect people to support your cause. The vast, vast majority of Americans DO NOT HOLD YOUR BELIEFS. And if you don't start to realize that, you will never convert people to your cause. Refusing to show at least some cooperation with the system in place means you will be forever marginalized. Raging against the media may be fun, but it doesn't do shit to get voters to our cause.

[BrooklynRider]

104. This "stunt" works. Let's assume they do get coverage....

Sure the media and Bush team might be inclined to show the "naked protestors". Everytime they publish that photo people will see "Stop AIDS" and "Drop the Debt" printed on their backs. Now, they will have to decide: (A) do they exploit these "crazies" and generate an expectedresponse from their base, while calling attention to AIDS funding and the debt, or (B) do they ignore it.

These protestors seem to agree with everyone here that this is exactly the stuff the media and Bush campaign will jump on - but will they use the photos and publish the message "stop AIDS", "drop the budget". If they make the cover of any paper, it was successful.

People get so freaked by nudity.

[Shadder]

68. Show me just one example

JUst one example of a protest where the focus of the media was on the families involved in it?

You would have never survived the 1960's

[jdj]

118. This is extreme naivete mixed with raging control issues.

repeat after me:

we are not in control of the media
we are not in control of the media
we are not in control of the media

[gardenista]

39. Sorry, they ain't part of me.

Now, if I said they were part of me, I'd be a hypocrite.

I don't hate these people, I hate how they'll be used by the media.

And if you don't think that this and other groups are infiltrated by Rovian ops, you're truly naive.

[Dickie Flatt]

30. Agreed

Unfortunately they will not. While there'll be a lot of good, peaceful, SANE protests in New York City, the few that are not will be the ones that get attention.

It's annoying. A well-organized protest can still be effective. But the ACT UP morons and all the other stunt-oriented protestors undercut the liberal message with this stupid crap. Don't they realize they're doing nothing to help their cause? People are not drawn to ACT UP's message when they see pictues of naked protestors. They laugh; it's funny, it's something for Leno to mock.

Violent protestors are even worse. What the hell do they think they're doing? While stunt protests are usually just ineffective, violent protests go beyond that and actually hurt the protestor's cause. Every single violent protestor in New York City is, in my mind, a complete moron. They are hurting their cause; nobody is drawn to your message when it seems you're more interested in breaking things than solving problems. If you're angry, stay home and punch a pillow, don't show up in NYC and fuck up the message delivered by peaceful, non-stunt protestors. Morons, all of them.

[maxsolomon]

18. are you people FOR aids or something?

i'd almost forgotten aids i'm so busy hating.

[rawstory]

31. RAW STORY leads with photo

Can't resist it. 'Drudgery,' I know, but an astonishing picture, even if the protesters look something like fools. Then again, they publicize the photos, they're fair game.

http://rawstory.com

[gardenista]

32. I love the one who was willing to shed all but her purse.

Must have had either her trust fund or her check from Rove in it.

This kind of bullshit, closing down streets, etc., marred the anti-war marches in SF.

Looks like they'll pull it off again in NYC.

Hope they're being paid well by Roveco.

[Judi Lynn]

89. Well expressed. I had exactly the same impression, couldn't focus

on a way to express it.

I think most of us DU'ers are well acquainted with the VERY old practice of provocateurs from without appearing to protest while acting like jackasses to distort the message, and create a circus atmosphere, bring ridicule, and eventually reinforce the rigid, brutal right-wing grip on the country.

If things escalate, and violence seems to erupt, it's easier to discredit ALL people who dissent. We've been aware that provocateurs have done this as recently as the WTO summit in Miami.

[DeepModem Mom]

33. Karl Rove LOVES this! Plays right into his hands --

Stupid!

[RodneyCK2]

45. No, they will most likely ignore this...

Any mentioning of protesting is bad for the Repugs. It would only call attention to the fact that people are against their regime.

I hope he does use it.

[gardenista]

52. Wanna bet?

I assure you, it will be used, along with anything else that looks loony, violent, or threatening to the voters we're trying to sway in the swing states.

[Dickie Flatt]

57. Mention of protest not necessarily bad for GOP

They want extreme, violent, stunt-based protests. Just like this. Just a stupid, stupid, stunt. A stunt that will change nobody's views, that will bring no help to their cause. Instead it will just go in the GOP's photo archive as an example of crazy protestors. People do not want to associate with crazies; as much as I wish it were true, not everyone holds the DU majority's beliefs on Bush. And that's why we have to use truly effective means to get our message across. Not this!

[Name removed]

80. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[dolstein]

53. What a bunch of idiotic narcicists

It certainly looks to me like they're more interested in creating a spectacle than they are in communicating a message. Needless to say, absolutely nothing is going to be accomplished by these ridiculous displays, except perhaps the further marginalization of the left-wing fringe, which is pretty marginalized to begin with.

[ronnykmarshall]

84. That about sums up ACT-UP.

They were effective at that start of the AIDS crisis in the late 80's and 90's, but not anymore.

[K8-EEE]

55. I Don't Feel This Is Effective.

They will just be seen as attention whores and exhibitionists my most people.

[Pastiche423]

56. "The police arrested the group

once they were able to clear the throngs of media away from the activists."

The reason for a protest, whether it be clothed or not, is to get attention.

For the past four years, little attention has been paid to the REAL ISSUES that face our nation.

Power to the People!

[pfitz59]

75. Throngs of media.....

that's the ticket. Anything to divert the cameras away from Chicken George and his Nazi pals. Naked works for me....

[Emboldened Chimp]

62. Much Ado About Nothing

This is a minor protest that will go virtually unnoticed. Most of your average Americans won't even know this happened. But they will know about the massive numbers that will show up during convention week. Never fret, DUers...

[Carolab]

81. I think it would be funny

if they painted "stop Bush" on their tummies instead...

[arwalden]

88. Wow... Impressive.

I haven't seen THIS many personal attacks by one person in a single post in a long time.

-- Allen

[RodneyCK2]

90. This thread proves that their tactics work!!!!

Look at how many people have decided to respond and think about this topic. You could be posting on other threads.

They have successfully diverted your attention and thinking. Get it? This is why activism in any form, especially extreme, is effective.

[arwalden]

93. I Guess That's Why I'm Sooooo Sympathetic To PETA Causes, Eh?

LOL. I think many of these folks confuse publicity with persuasion. They aren't the same thing.

[RodneyCK2]

99. I guess you cooooould say the same thing about activism for AIDS..

in the 80's, suddenly it is not so funny, because it worked. eh?

[arwalden]

109. No I Don't Believe So...

I do not see a cause and effect between those types of protests and a softening of public opinion or policy making that benefited the people with AIDS.

I think change was inevitable, and it would have come around sooner but not for.

The humor I find is not in the injustices, but in how some folks and some groups are too naive about what they think they think they are accomplishing compared to the reality of it all... and compared to the actual harm they end up causing. But not for their indignant and defiant arrogance about it all, it would be sad.

-- Allen

[Name removed]

112. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[jdj]

114. Now you've got me in tears.

Those of us who were there, who remember salute the courage of ACT-UP, and people with that kind of dedication.

Those of us who don't remember, and don't know what the hell they are talking about should thank God for that ignorance and shut up.

[arwalden]

117. Of Course You Are Free To Believe In Fairy Tales

and your post hoc reasoning. There's little I can do about that. Carry on.

-- Allen

[ibegurpard]

128. No one was concerned about AIDS until "straight" people started getting it

On a national scale, I mean. That was the major factor, in my opinion, not the efforts of AIDS activists, as laudable as those efforts were. I DID live through it and let's not kid ourselves, there are STILL some people who think it's a gay disease and thus deserved. That was the mindset during the early 80's: "Oh, how horrible...but it doesn't affect me so I don't care all that much." Also, the fact that so many early victims of AIDS were in the arts community, they had built-in connections to many high-profile people who could command an audience when they spoke about it.
I certainly don't care how people want to express themselves as long as they maintain peacefulness and order. I suppose the EFFECTIVENESS depends upon what they are trying to accomplish. If your are trying to PERSUADE people of something then parading naked down the street is not going to play well to a big bloc of people. Don't bitch at me about it... I'm not the one with the hang-ups about nudity.

[jdj]

113. Then you must not be a queer with a bunch of dead friends.

I can't even respond to the rest of it.

[arwalden]

115. Yeah... I'm Not Queer... I'm Straight. You're On To Me.

>>I can't even respond to the rest of it.<<

Good. I can't imagine any response that would have been of much interest to me. You made a wise choice.

[jdj]

120. yes, you are definitely blessed.

be grateful, not critical.

[arwalden]

123. I Hardly Think You're The Person To Offer Me Instruction

on what I should think or how I should act. This is the same kind of arrogance I see in these groups. --- Keep it up and see how far it gets you with me. Give it a try and see if you can persuade ME with your attitude.

Go for it!

I still believe that these groups do more harm than good. Does "good" happen? That depends on your definition of what "good" is and what you consider to be "progress".

While some folks may be able to isolate one or two examples of something "good" that results from these types of theatrics and illegal and violent acts from these groups... I still maintain that on the whole they do more harm that good. The sum total is in the RED.

-- Allen

[Name removed]

124. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

125. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

126. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

127. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

131. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

133. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[RodneyCK2]

135. Well it looks like most of our posts have been deleted...

Allen, we obviously have different opinions and views on activism, past and present. I wish you no ill-will and I am glad that we debated, although there is no evidence of it, LOL.

It is ironic (and I am seeing this more and more on DU) that you can not actually have a debate here, despite the fact it is a "forum", LOL.

Whatever, see you around.
Rodney

[jdj]

107. I think alot of folks here are thinking that we are all clones.

It's a big wide world out there.

Our minds cant comprehend the diversity present in a city block, much less a city.

[markses]

136. What you think is immaterial: PETA has been extremely successful

in winning concessions from the food and drug industry. Whether they set "offensive" tactics as an extreme form of bargaining, they certainly make the issue available, and when people learn about the issues, as they often do, they tend to agree with a moderate version of PETA's program. Twenty years ago McDonald's executives would have laughed at you about animal welfare. Not anymore. And if it now part of their co-opted marketing strategy, it is still a step forward.

Now, that said, I think PETA could use different rhetorical strategies for different occasions, but the idea that PETA's strategies aren't effective is disproven by any objective analysis of PETA's interaction with industry and the public. It is simply wrong, by the facts of the case.

-------------------------------------------------
http://www.all-creatures.org/articles/ar-welfare-rights.html
PETA Power

In the case of McDonald’s, Burger King, and Wendy’s, the astute person realizes that they did not make these changes voluntarily, but rather were dragged kicking and screaming to the bargaining table and only made concessions when their public image was sufficiently bruised. Specifically, PETA was the leading force in coercing all three fast food giants into reforming the unconscionable practices of their suppliers. While a number of PETA campaigns have proved unpopular with both the media and the animal rights community – such as their “Got Beer?” and “Eat the Whales” fiascoes – there is no question they are often highly effective in defending animal rights, such as evident in their recent attacks on fast food chains.

PETA’s campaign against the Big 3 began in July 1997 when they wrote to the CEO of McDonald’s and demanded significant reforms in their treatment of farm animals. PETA’s strike followed on the heels of an 80 page verdict by Chief Justice Roger Bell of the British High Court in London during the famous “McLibel” trial that found McDonald’s “culpably responsible” for cruelties in the raising of broiler chickens, laying hens, and pigs.
(see http://www.mcspotlight.org/case/index.html )

The abominations inflicted on animals raised for McDonald’s -- standard practices for modern factory farms and slaughterhouses – include: chickens crammed into cages inside filthy warehouses, with each bird having less space to stand than a standard size sheet of paper and suffering injuries and broken bones when grabbed for slaughter; pigs raised in cement stalls so small they can not turn around; and inadequate stunning at the slaughterhouse such that at least 1 in 20 animals are dismembered while fully conscious.

With Ray Kroc’s Evil Empire on the ropes, PETA seized the initiative and began making demands on McDonald’s to significantly improve their treatment of farm animals. PETA demanded that McDonald’s:

(1) meet minimum standards recommended by the USDA and provide chickens at least one and one-half square feet of living space;

(2) cease selling eggs from factory-farmed hens;

(3) mandate improved standards for chicken transport and slaughter;

(4) abolish the use of genetically altered birds that suffer painful leg deformities;

(5) buy pigs only from farms that do not confine them in cramped cement stalls and provide breeding sows with room to move around outdoors;

(6) Stop buying from suppliers who debeak hens; (photo-left)

(7) ensure that animals are properly stunned before being killed;

(8) humanely euthanize “downer” animals who arrive at the slaughterhouse severely injured, rather than tossing them into a “dead pile” to be processed into food with the other animals; and

(9) include a vegetarian burger at all U.S. restaurants.

For two frustrating years PETA was involved in constant negotiations with McDonald’s by way of letters, phone calls, and appearances at their shareholder meetings. They worked with Dr. Temple Grandin, a noted expert in ameliorating the suffering of factory farmed animals, who suggested McDonald’s suppliers slow down the speed of the killing line, have two people stunning the animals to insure they are unconscious before slaughter, and implement unannounced audits of their suppliers. PETA gave McDonald’s every opportunity to become a leading force in addressing animal welfare issues, but after seeing no commitment to major reform and sensing that McDonald’s was interested only in staging a public relations ploy, PETA unleashed a full-scale assault on the company on August 12, 1999. PETA organized 400 demonstrations in 23 countries and over 300 cities. They distributed leaflets, posters, and stickers, with graphic pictures of slaughtered animals and biting parodies of McDonald’s slogan such as “Animals Deserve a Break Today” and “McDonalds. Cruelty to go.” Most provocatively, at schools across the globe PETA passed out “Unhappy Meals” – colorful cardboard lunch boxes containing information about how animals are raised and slaughtered. PETA made it vividly clear that McDonald’s -- a company with $36 billion dollars in gross annual revenues! -- did not care enough about animals to alleviate their unimaginable sufferings by any measure or, indeed, to obey the “humane slaughter” law.

In June 2000, PETA acknowledged McDonald’s had made some improvements in terms of better cattle stunning, handling of chickens, and implementation of audits, but had still not addressed most of the problems raised by Justice Bell’s critique and their own demands. In August 2000, however, McDonald’s agreed to stop buying poultry products from suppliers that debeak chickens, provide less than 72 square inches per bird, and uses forced molting to increase egg production. PETA applauded this measure but held out for more reforms and continued their campaign. Finally, in September 2000, McDonald’s committed to more substantive reforms: they increased the cage size of laying hens, eliminated debeaking, ceased forced molting, called for more humane methods of catching chickens, and began to audit slaughterhouses and cut off suppliers who do not comply with “humane slaughter” standards. Consequently, PETA announced a two-year moratorium on all protests against McDonald’s. While commending them on the steps taken, PETA insisted much more needed to be done, and they outlined additional needed reforms such as refusing purchases from farms that confine sows (photo-left), selling only free range chickens, improving slaughtering methods, and rigorously upgrading slaughterhouse inspections. If their demands are not met by September 1, 2002, PETA vowed to renew their campaign, Unhappy Meals and all.

After their declared “victory” with McDonald’s, who was setting industry standards for others to follow, PETA next set Burger King and Wendy’s in their crosshairs. They made the same demands and achieved the same results. Importantly, Burger King and Wendy’s have also agreed to announce inspections of their suppliers and to sever ties with any found in violation of legal standards. As the goal of each campaign took increasingly less time and effort to realize, it is clear that PETA has become a force to reckon with and a major vehicle of reform in the food industry. They presently are encouraging McDonald’s to internationalize their U.S. standards, and are choosing their next targets, which likely will include additional fast-food chains such as chicken and pizza outlets, as well as major stores such as Wal-Mart and Albertson’s.

[arwalden]

140. PETA = DOMESTIC TERRORISM. They are criminal thugs.

I guess that all depends on what your definition of "success" is, eh?

-- Allen

[JohnLocke]

138. Dumbest. Protest. Ever.

[jdj]

98. a prayer for people upset about this:

[jdj]

100. god grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change

[jdj]

101. the courage to CHANGE THE THINGS I CAN

[jdj]

103. AND THE WISDOM TO KNOW THE DIFFERENCE

[yardwork]

102. I don't think that this helps at all.

It just reflects poorly on Democrats in general. I think these naked people are exhibitionists. They should hitch their wagon to some other cause, because they aren't helping mine. My opinion.

[eurolefty]

119. The sky is falling! The sky is falling!

I just love DU.
:evilgrin:

[jdj]

121. Maybe it's some demented plan by Rove to get all the people on

DU upset at each other so he hired some lib-leaning repukes to get naked so the DUer will hate each other and all our computers will explode.

It could happen, I mean.

He's that powerful

[NanBo]

130. I'm curious

How do you define "successful"? I'm quite serious. Given the lack of consensus on a board devoted to Democratic support, how, in the overall public picture is this considered 'successful'? Can one determine the success of a protest at the time it is done (as you've done with this example) or does the response from the general public/media etc part of the 'success' equation? DOES the general public's reaction have any bearing on the success of a protest?

I'm actually thinking towards next week when I ask this question--not just of your claim to success with this protest.

Thanks.

[JohnLocke]

139. Dumbest. Protest. Ever.

[DaveSZ]

142. How again was that successful?

nt

[Feanorcurufinwe]

143. Wow, I would never have imagined

a simple naked protest would be so controversial at DU.

Demonstrations always will be an important form of protest. The structure can vary from a rally or teach-in to a massive civil disobedience such as the confronting of the warmakers at the Pentagon or a smoke-in. A demonstration is different from other forms of warfare because it invites people other than those planning the action via publicity to participate. It also is basically non-violent in nature. A complete understanding of the use of media is necessary to create the publicity needed to get the word out. Numbers of people are only one of the many factors in an effective demonstration. The timing, choice of target and tactics to be employed are equally important. There have been demonstrations of 400,000 that are hardly remembered and demonstrations of a few dozen that were remarkably effective. Often the critical element involved is the theater. Those who say a demonstration should be concerned with education rather than theater don't understand either and will never organize a successful demonstration, or for that matter, a successful revolution.
-- Abbie Hoffman
http://www.tenant.net/Community/steal/steal.html#3.03.0

[Moderator]

144. locking

Far too many personal attacks.