Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: eagl on February 09, 2008, 08:36:12 AM
-
Not sure if this was already discussed, but I didn't see anything in here on it so...
I think what Berkeley REALLY wants is to secede from the union. They're certainly trying hard to get the military to react. Fortunately the military is being adult about this, but some in congress are working on a way to give the Berkeley liberals exactly what they want... Remove as much of the federal govt as possible from Berkeley, including millions in what are essentially pork-barrel funds for special projects there.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/02/07/berkeley.protests/index.html
As a military member, I don't think I'm allowed to have an opinion about this other than to point people at the USMC press releases... So you guys can make your own decisions about a local govt and populace that twists opposing a government war policy into a recruiting office being an "invasion", with USMC "predators" roaming the streets of the town. Apparently they want to "take back civilian control" of the military not by changing out the civilian leadership of the military, but by demonizing both the USMC and individual military members.
-
I disagree with what Berkeley did and the things they said were terrible, but I'm even more disturbed with the way the federal government used the threat of withholding federal funds to force compliance. Big central government goes against everything our founding fathers stood for.
-
last i heard berkley city council changed it's mind when threatened with losing $2 million in govt funding, ( govt funding=taxpayers money give away).
$2 million for berkley and people wonder why the govt is in debt. Imagine how many "berkleys" there are in the country, all with their hands out.
-
Hippies are funny.
-
I saw a video of the pink protesters physically blocking the entrance to the USMC office. If these would have been anti-abortion protesters, they would have been arrested and charged via the RICO act.
-
Originally posted by Chairboy
I disagree with what Berkeley did and the things they said were terrible, but I'm even more disturbed with the way the federal government used the threat of withholding federal funds to force compliance. Big central government goes against everything our founding fathers stood for.
The alternative might be to send in federal employees with guns... Which would you have? The threatened funding appears to be pure pork-barrel funding, not entitlements or program money that "everyone" gets. Seems reasonable to me... Although I think that most pork-barrel projects ought to be in fact funded by state and local governments, it seems reasonable to me that "gift" money be withheld if the recipient fails to comply with, or actively attacks, federal government policy.
It's not much different than Montana missing out on decades worth of highway funding because they refused to implement a 55mph speed limit... Fail to comply, and you don't get the extra money. Simple. Congress is applying the same principle, except here its a direct action rather than a generic rule. Attempt to remove a very high priority federal government office from your town, and you risk losing your pork barrel funding.
And regarding those who say it's an attack against "the children" because one of those pork barrel projects is a school lunch program... Who gives a flying fart? The state of California has a ROBUST school meal program. This program is not that big, and it would be trivial for the state to pick up coverage if in fact it is actually necessary and the governator thinks Berkeley really needs the money.
-
What I heard was that the sniveling coward of a mayor profusely apologized when he thought he might lose federal funds. This should serve as an example to everyone just what sort of people these are who enjoy life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness secured by those very people they hold in contempt. I expect children to be ignorant and sometimes foolish. When adults act this way they need to be treated as children.
-
Berkley city government has decided to recognise and support bias and discrimination officially. As such there is no reason for the Federal Government not to withhold funds in the face of a lack of equal protection and expression on the part of berkley city government.
-
I dont see a problem with the city deciding what businesses are in the city. They do it all the time with walmarts. If they don't want bars, strip joints walmarts or recruiting stations it should be the cities choice.
Think the people with the signs are over the top, The government threatening them is worse.
-
Originally posted by Trell
I dont see a problem with the city deciding what businesses are in the city. They do it all the time with walmarts. If they don't want bars, strip joints walmarts or recruiting stations it should be the cities choice.
Think the people with the signs are over the top, The government threatening them is worse.
Do you honestly not see the difference between Walmart and a recruiting station? What has this country come to?
-
Originally posted by eagl
As a military member, I don't think I'm allowed to have an opinion about this other than to point people at the USMC press releases... So you guys can make your own decisions about a local govt and populace that twists opposing a government war policy into a recruiting office being an "invasion", with USMC "predators" roaming the streets of the town.
Eagl ~ I believe that you're ALWAYS allowed to have your own opinion on any topic. I think that sharing it with the public may be what is sometimes frowned upon.
-
Originally posted by Trell
I dont see a problem with the city deciding what businesses are in the city. They do it all the time with walmarts. If they don't want bars, strip joints walmarts or recruiting stations it should be the cities choice.
Think the people with the signs are over the top, The government threatening them is worse.
Ummm.... The USMC is not a "business", and it is already fully under the control of civilian leadership.
Except for the emotional aspects, this is little different than trying to kick the US post office or the IRS office out of town.
-
As for the "government threats", that's utter BS. Allocating federal funding is one of the explicit duties of congress. They voted to give Berkeley these extra pork barrel funds, and it's at least as legitimate of an act to vote to halt this funding for any reason seen appropriate by congress. That's what they DO.
If Berkeley was entitled to those funds, they'd get them. That's why certain federal funding programs are called "entitlements". Everyone is entitled to get that money. The rest is gravy, subject to congressional votes on who does and does not get it.
Threats... Some people sound like they think the government is going to roll in the BATF and shoot/arrest everyone in sight. What a bunch of nonsense. Taxes and funding change every time a new law is passed, so by that argument, every citizen is constantly threatened by the government every day of their lives. Ron Paul might agree (heh) but I don't think this meets the test of emotional hysteria being put forward by those shocked (shocked I say, shocked!) that the federal government might not be willing to shovel pork barrel money at a city that is attempting to remove an official federal office while demonizing the organization's employees.
-
the city council of Berkley did not think the threats were BS, they ran like scared little rabbits.
-
Isn't Berkeley where they installed the pot vending machines?
Nah, was LA
-
Originally posted by AKIron
Do you honestly not see the difference between Walmart and a recruiting station? What has this country come to?
Not really They both should be decided by local government.
We should be happy, this would have meant that less tax dollars would go to the upkeep of this building.
-
Originally posted by Chairboy
I disagree with what Berkeley did and the things they said were terrible, but I'm even more disturbed with the way the federal government used the threat of withholding federal funds to force compliance. Big central government goes against everything our founding fathers stood for.
I believe it's a good thing that the Federal Government is threatening to withhold funds. The government in no way, shape or form OWES this money to them, regardless of the promised destination.
-
Originally posted by Trell
Not really They both should be decided by local government.
We should be happy, this would have meant that less tax dollars would go to the upkeep of this building.
The people of that city have a responsibility to the nation under whose banner they enjoy many privileges and freedom. This goes way beyond simply paying their taxes every April 15th.
-
There are some parts of this country that I would be happy to see secede, and Berkly is one of them. Maybe we can throw a bone to those MEChA folks and just give it back to Mexico.
Charon
-
Originally posted by eagl
Ummm.... The USMC is not a "business", and it is already fully under the control of civilian leadership.
Except for the emotional aspects, this is little different than trying to kick the US post office or the IRS office out of town.
The US Post office provides a local service. The IRS collect federal taxes.
Berkeley Supports the military by paying taxes, It should be their choice if they want a local recruiting station.
They are not making a lay banning people that serve in the military from the city/.
-
trell, please cite the law that allows the city to deny a recruiting office in their city.
-
Originally posted by Trell
The US Post office provides a local service.
You're implying that the USMC doesn't provide any services, and some regions should be somehow excluded from essential functions such as recruiting for the military services that ensure our national defense?
:huh
Dude. Amazing. You might want to crack open a history book or two.
The current administration's war policy is an excuse to forbid the USMC from recruiting in Berkeley, and an excuse from preventing Berkeley residents from being able to easily find out information about military service?
Is "liberal" supposed to be the new label for people arbitrarily excluded from military service? As far as that goes, it might even be illegal on an anti-discrimination basis to close that recruiting office simply because some activists don't want recruiting to go on there. Isn't that discriminating against the (probable minority of) people in Berkeley who are in fact interested in military service?
The last time a bunch of white guys tried to get together to prevent a minority group from joining military services, the whole nation got a wake-up call. Removing a military recruiting office is an effort to intimidate people, nothing more. That's generally considered a crime.
-
Principles sold for a few bucks aren't worth buying.
"Berkeley city officials indicated they likely would withhold now sending a letter containing the message they agreed on at last week's council meeting."
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,329866,00.html
-
The official USMC position is a pretty good assessment of the true situation...
Gunnery Sgt. Pauline Franklin, a spokeswoman for the Marine Corps Recruiting Command, told CNN there is "no plan for that office to move."
She said recruiters are there to "provide information to qualified men and women who are looking for opportunities that they may benefit from by serving in the military."
"The Marine Corps is here to support and defend the Constitution of the United States, which does guarantee the freedom of speech," Franklin said. "In terms of the situation in Berkeley, the City Council and the protesters are exercising their right to do so."
-
Originally posted by john9001
trell, please cite the law that allows the city to deny a recruiting office in their city.
Please cite the law requiring all cities to have a recruiting station.
-
Originally posted by Trell
Please cite the law requiring all cities to have a recruiting station.
The federal government is authorized by the constitution to raise an army. That pretty much covers recruiting.
Any more silly questions?
-
Originally posted by eagl
You're implying that the USMC doesn't provide any services, and some regions should be somehow excluded from essential functions such as recruiting for the military services that ensure our national defense?
:huh
Dude. Amazing. You might want to crack open a history book or two.
The current administration's war policy is an excuse to forbid the USMC from recruiting in Berkeley, and an excuse from preventing Berkeley residents from being able to easily find out information about military service?
Is "liberal" supposed to be the new label for people arbitrarily excluded from military service? As far as that goes, it might even be illegal on an anti-discrimination basis to close that recruiting office simply because some activists don't want recruiting to go on there. Isn't that discriminating against the (probable minority of) people in Berkeley who are in fact interested in military service?
are you implying Berkeley tax dollars don't pay for the USMC ?
Are you recruiting people that have never heard of the internet? you make it sound like that recruiting office is the only place they can get information.
phones, internet, even other recruiting stations.
i don't believe that it is any more discriminating then any city choosing what types of businesses they allow.
-
Originally posted by eagl
The federal government is authorized by the constitution to raise an army. That pretty much covers recruiting.
Any more silly questions?
Yes by banning that recruiting station are you saying the boys joining are to stupid to join with out that single station?
Guess all those ads i see on tv telling me to call 800 go army must be for something else..
-
Originally posted by eagl
The official USMC position is a pretty good assessment of the true situation...
that local station is still bound by local laws, They still must meet zoning requirements, local fire codes and any other local requirements for them to be there,
If towns can have laws banning walmarts, bars, and strip clubs, Why not recruiting stations?
-
Originally posted by Trell
Yes by banning that recruiting station are you saying the boys joining are to stupid to join with out that single station?
You're intentionally missing the point, which is not particularly suprising.
Your position is that local politicians have the authority to override the constitutionally mandated authority and responsibility of the federal government to raise and maintain an army.
There isn't anything else behind your argument. Nothing. No substance, no basis in fact or law. You are siding with protesters calling the USMC "intruders" and Marines "predators" over a local government's right to override an explicit authority and responsibility in the constitution.
Hence, the thread title statement that Berkeley is attempting to secede. Because their argument is based entirely on their assumed right to circumvent and override the constitution.
You're really beating yourself up over this... You might consider a cream soda and hot bath.
-
Originally posted by Trell
If towns can have laws banning walmarts, bars, and strip clubs, Why not recruiting stations?
Why does it continue to escape you that the military is not a business like wal-mart? It is a constitutionally mandated and federally managed government organization. In fact, that makes it even more legitimate than the IRS and post office, neither of which is specifically mentioned in the constitution as organizations that MUST be part of our federal government.
The constitution allows for taxation, but does not require it nor specify how this taxation is to occur. The post office was created by a piece of legislation after the nation was created. The military however, is explicitly listed as a mandatory organization, the creation and maintenance of which is authorized and REQUIRED.
Your position, and the position of the Berkeley city government, is that the city has the authority to override the government's obligation to raise and maintain military forces. Simply put, Berkeley doesn't have a say except through their right to attempt to elect officials who are in charge of how the federal government carries out this obligation.
-
Not to mention a moral obligation to support the liberties they enjoy. Seems they know little about that though.
-
Originally posted by AKIron
Not to mention a moral obligation to support the liberties they enjoy. Seems they know little about that though.
Never count on a liberal to recognize any moral obligations other than their own, based on the emotional arguments of the day. It's pretty much their defining characteristic, that their moral obligations are determined entirely on their own personal emotional experiences. Whether or not excluding lessons of history, real factual evidence, or the opinions of others is deliberate or a side-effect of ignorance (not stupidity, but ignorance... ie. a lack of knowledge) is open to debate.
-
Originally posted by Trell
The US Post office provides a local service. The IRS collect federal taxes.
Berkeley Supports the military by paying taxes, It should be their choice if they want a local recruiting station.
They are not making a lay banning people that serve in the military from the city/.
It should be their choice. But know that as per the 16th ammendment, the Federal Government is under NO obligation to spend any money on Berkeley, regardless of how much or how little the Berkeley tax payers have spent.
-
Originally posted by Trell
If towns can have laws banning walmarts, bars, and strip clubs, Why not recruiting stations?
this is where you are wrong, cities cannot ban walmarts, bars, and strip clubs or any other legal business, they can only control the zoning of where the business can go, but they cannot zone the city so that there is no place the business can be put.
cities have tried to zone legal adult businesses out of their cities and lost in court, it's called baning by rezoning or something.
-
i don't know why the Marines would want to recruit anyone from Berkley, the Marines need men not little girly boys.
-
Originally posted by Scatcat
I saw a video of the pink protesters physically blocking the entrance to the USMC office. If these would have been anti-abortion protesters, they would have been arrested and charged via the RICO act.
http://www.breitbart.tv/?p=41464&comments=1
Had to search for it.
-
So Trell,
I'm guessing here but , your probably not going to be doing any military service huh?
-
RedTop, do you know what an ad-hominem attack is? I'm not saying that you've crossed that line yet, but you seem to be heading in that direction.
-
Originally posted by Chairboy
RedTop, do you know what an ad-hominem attack is? I'm not saying that you've crossed that line yet, but you seem to be heading in that direction.
:rolleyes:
I just asked....read what ya like in to it.
-
I think hominems can still sign up, as long as they don't tell anyone:D
-
I personally feel we would have a better civillian population in our country if it was manditory to serve our nation in one of the armed forces for a term of three years. Our young men and women would benifit from the experiance of boot camp.
On the flip side, I'd hate to be the sargeant that had to deal with some of these rejects that would come through; speaking from experiance, there is a lot to be said for our all volunteer force.
-
California - The Land of the Fruits, and Nuts, and the Flakes.
And a few limousine liberals who lack the simple gratitude towards or servicemen and women that common decency would require.
-
Originally posted by Scatcat
http://www.breitbart.tv/?p=41464&comments=1
Had to search for it.
These guys are as stupid as those idiots protesting at funerals. Not nearly as mean but just as stupid.
-
See Rule #4, #5
-
Originally posted by lutrel
I personally feel we would have a better civillian population in our country if it was manditory to serve our nation in one of the armed forces for a term of three years. Our young men and women would benifit from the experiance of boot camp.
On the flip side, I'd hate to be the sargeant that had to deal with some of these rejects that would come through; speaking from experiance, there is a lot to be said for our all volunteer force.
It works' for the Swiss, and a couple of other Euro countries, though.
As to how they manage with the mass of kids' who might not particularly want to be there, is anyone's guess.
If we were to do something like that, we would have some diffuculty, I believe.
-
Originally posted by john9001
i don't know why the Marines would want to recruit anyone from Berkley, the Marines need men not little girly boys.
Minefield detectors? :D
Seriously though, if someone is willing to enlist in a place chock full of people
like Bezerkly, I say more power to em!
-
Originally posted by Trell
Guess all those ads i see on tv telling me to call 800 go army must be for something else..
Troll,
You are correct, sir! Those ads ARE for something else...the Army. The topic of discussion is a Marines recruiting station.
-
So much for "supporting the troops." It appears their true feelings about the military, unwillingly held in check since 2001, are at last breaking free of all restraint.
Some of you folks might want to bone up on the U.S. Constitution....specifically Article VI. It states: "This Constitution and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof...or which shall be made under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land...anything in the Constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding."
That means that if the USMC, which is under the control of our duly elected officials in the federal government as established by the Constitution, decides to open a recruiting office in any U.S. city, they will do so. Period.
Try telling the U.S. Congress that the city of Berkely has the right to send the recruiters packing. The mirth will cross party lines.
-
Originally posted by eagl
Never count on a liberal to recognize any moral obligations other than their own, based on the emotional arguments of the day. It's pretty much their defining characteristic, that their moral obligations are determined entirely on their own personal emotional experiences. Whether or not excluding lessons of history, real factual evidence, or the opinions of others is deliberate or a side-effect of ignorance (not stupidity, but ignorance... ie. a lack of knowledge) is open to debate.
This should be carved in stone and put up for all to see. Awesome.
-
Originally posted by DiabloTX
This should be carved in stone and put up for all to see. Awesome.
It would be better to grant them a view of reality that would change their perspective. No idea how to do that though.
-
Well, it'd be a helluva start in my eyes.
-
Berkeley is playing a dangerous game and not thinking about the consequences. And they can't have it both ways.
I've been following the media stories about this. What I find intriguing is that the kooks there feel their freedom of speech is being upended because...get this...their speech, AND ACTIONS, have dire consequences.
As citizens, sure, they can have their say all they want. But when they go out of their way (Pink Zone parking out front?) to show their bias in the local government, then the gloves should come off.
To their credit, the Marines have bit their tongues and let this play out.
But between Berkeley's recent actions, and San Fran trying to ban Fleet Week...its just a bit much.
-
Originally posted by LePaul
Berkeley is playing a dangerous game and not thinking about the consequences. And they can't have it both ways.
I've been following the media stories about this. What I find intriguing is that the kooks there feel their freedom of speech is being upended because...get this...their speech, AND ACTIONS, have dire consequences.
As citizens, sure, they can have their say all they want. But when they go out of their way (Pink Zone parking out front?) to show their bias in the local government, then the gloves should come off.
To their credit, the Marines have bit their tongues and let this play out.
But between Berkeley's recent actions, and San Fran trying to ban Fleet Week...its just a bit much.
I think the Marines are pretty good at maintaining discipline in the face of adversity. A few fat loud mouths aren't likely to provoke much of a reaction.
-
If Berkely secedes may I be the first to put my name in the hat for the role of General Sherman this time around.
I'm gonna torch the Birkenstock store, the headshop, and Code Stink first if selected.
the only good hippy is a dead hippy.
-
"The Rev. Fred Phelps, the anti-gay activist and founder of the Westboro Baptist Church, will be there as well, demonstrating against both the Marines and Code Pink."
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,330419,00.html
Its really getting strange now. Whats next hehe.
-
He just wants media attention
And a beating.
-
Bizerkly should be burned to the ground and then the ground salted.
-
Here you go guys.
This should get you good and riled up. Look! How incredibly stupid these people are!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AmdrkmtkCw4
They are a bunch of morons. A fringe element, not dissimilar to KKK members or White Supremacists on the right. Ivory Tower types... what does the O'Club like to say... oh yeah, femi-nazis.
A shame, really, because they just provide fodder for the wingnut right, an easy target to try and paint a broad brush strokes with.
"See", the Limbaughs of the world say, "liberals HATE the troops".
Sigh.
It makes a much sense as saying that all white conservatives secretly hate blacks, because Trent Lott stood up at Strom Thurmonds 100th birthday bash and said we all should have voted for Thurmond in 1948, then we "wouldn't have had all these problems".
(Thurmond's party ran under a platform that declared in part, "We stand for the segregation of the races and the racial integrity of each race.")
http://archives.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/12/09/lott.comment/
Also, the university itself has no affiliation with Code pink, so threatening to pull funding for research going on there makes no sense either. It was the city government that gave them a parking space in front of the recruitment office. Take the fed funding from the city, not the school.
-
Originally posted by Trell
are you implying Berkeley tax dollars don't pay for the USMC ?
Are you recruiting people that have never heard of the internet? you make it sound like that recruiting office is the only place they can get information.
phones, internet, even other recruiting stations.
Not everyone has access to a phone, television or the Internet, so for these people a recruiting station is the only way for them to get information.
ack-ack
-
Originally posted by john9001
this is where you are wrong, cities cannot ban walmarts, bars, and strip clubs or any other legal business, they can only control the zoning of where the business can go, but they cannot zone the city so that there is no place the business can be put.
Whether or not cities can, cities still do it. In National City they decided to get rid of their "sleazy" image by prohibiting strip joints and tattoo parlors by zoning them out. Whether or not it's legal is up in the air but to date no business trying to open a strip joint or tattoo parlor has been successful in challenging the zoning regulations. Even in areas where some old time tattoo parlors are already in existance (near the 32nd St. Naval Base) are being forced out because the National City Council are changing the zoning regulations. Case in point, a tattoo parlor near one of the local high schools that has been in the same location for 50+ years (2nd oldest tattoo parlor in National City). The business was forced to relocate to another city after zoning regulation changes prohibited a tattoo parlor from being within 1000ft of a public school. The tattoo parlor couldn't get a new permit to operate in National City because of the new zoning regulations.
ack-ack
-
Here's one liberal Berkeley councilman's thoughts on the situation.
Kriss Worthington, a progressive Berkeley activist and council member for 11 years, believes the council overreached.
"The inflammatory language in the City Council item is really outrageous -- not just to right-wing people, but to mainstream liberal people and even to some peace activists who have said they're insulted that the city would have such language," Worthington said.
He said Berkeley owes an apology to the military and to the peace movement "for having such embarrassing language allegedly trying to promote peace."
"When you make a colossal blunder, you can't just sort of ignore the mistake and go about your way. You have to do something to fix it," Worthington said
ack-ack
-
Originally posted by Ack-Ack
Here's one liberal Berkeley councilman's thoughts on the situation.
ack-ack
Ah, the voice of reason, melodious is it not?
-
Originally posted by eagl
Why does it continue to escape you that the military is not a business like wal-mart? It is a constitutionally mandated...
True for the Army and Navy. ;)
-
Originally posted by Sandman
True for the Army and Navy. ;)
The USAF made short work of the world's third largest Army in 1991. If a constitutional amendment is required to keep it active who will object?
maybe it was the fourth, memory ain't what it usta be
-
Originally posted by Trell
The US Post office provides a local service. The IRS collect federal taxes.
Berkeley Supports the military by paying taxes, It should be their choice if they want a local recruiting station.
Their taxes also support the local police force.
Should it also be their choice which laws they should abide by?
-
Originally posted by Sox62
Their taxes also support the local police force.
Should it also be their choice which laws they should abide by?
To a certain extent, they do just that.
-
Originally posted by Sandman
To a certain extent, they do just that.
When our government fails to enforce our border laws citizens notice. If the citizens of these United States become selective in the laws they endorse chaos will reign. The beginning of the end has begun. When exactly is debatable but we are on the slope.
-
Originally posted by Sandman
True for the Army and Navy. ;)
Shhh ;) Besides, the USMC is part of the navy so pbbbthththth
-
Sorry I am late on this but this meeting is still going on!!
watch here> http://berkeley.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?publish_id=2
I hope Bezerkeley falls apart of they push our military out. Next time if something major happens in that city like a major flood or fire, I pray the military does not help them.
-
BERKELEY, Calif. —
City councilmembers who were heavily criticized for telling Marine recruiters they don't belong here have moderated their position, saying they oppose the war in Iraq but support the troops.
Berkeley's City Council voted two weeks ago to send a letter to a downtown recruiting station advising the U.S. Marines they are not welcome.
After a marathon session that stretched into early Wednesday, the council decided not to send the letter, saying they recognize recruiters' right to be in Berkeley. The council said they still strongly oppose the war and the recruitment of young people into it, but "deeply respect and support" the men and women of the armed forces.
• View photos of protests staged at Berkeley City Hall
Some on the council had pushed for issuing an apology. But others rejected that, saying they just wanted to clarify their position.
Councilwoman Linda Maio said the council opposes recruitment, not the military. "It's behavior that we oppose, not the people," she said.
The meeting drew hundreds of people on both sides of the issue who rallied from dawn until well into the night outside City Hall.
Inside the chamber, scores of speakers addressed the council.
Some decried the council's earlier action.
"You owe our military an apology," said Kevin Graves, a San Francisco Bay area resident who said his son died serving in Iraq.
But others applauded the council's stand.
Medea Benjamin, co-founder of the anti-war group Code Pink, said her group supports the troops — "we support them so much that we're desperate to get them back home."
In rallies outside, members of the pro-military group Move America Forward waved flags and held signs including "Boycott Berkeley for Bashing Our Boys" and "Support our Troops."
Meanwhile, protesters with Code Pink waved signs saying "Peace Now" and "Bring Our Troops Home."
At its height, police estimated the crowd at about 2,000. A handful of people were arrested for scuffles between protesters, said Berkeley police spokeswoman Sgt. Mary Kusmiss.
The recruiting office opened in Berkeley in late 2006 and operated quietly until four months ago when Code Pink began holding regular protests.
The City Council's initial vote Jan. 29 outraged several lawmakers, who have threatened to withhold millions in state and federal money destined for Berkeley.
On Tuesday, more than 40 House Republican members asked President Bush to immediately rescind over $2 million in earmarks awarded to Berkeley.
-
Funny, all this, and a particular line item on Berkley's city council meeting was pretty much ignored...
Approval to send a letter to the Canadian Government urging them to offer sanctuary to "war resisters".
Between the Phelps clan, the ANSWER stalinists, code pink beast-feed-a-thons, World Can't Wait maoists in their orange jumpsuits, and a skitzophrenic city council...
am I the only one who just finds it funny as hell?
-
Crackpots...
-
Well, now it is getting really stupid.
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/ireports/2008/02/13/vo.irpt.berkeley.protests.ireports
Now, they are burning the American flag in the street. It's unclear who these people are, if they are Code Pink or what.
Now pretty much everybody, even the left side of the Democratic party, has written them off.
-
Originally posted by Dos Equis
Well, now it is getting really stupid.
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/ireports/2008/02/13/vo.irpt.berkeley.protests.ireports
Now, they are burning the American flag in the street. It's unclear who these people are, if they are Code Pink or what.
Now pretty much everybody, even the left side of the Democratic party, has written them off.
Send one Marine to the street, without a weapon, they'll all scatter.