Quote, "----- Original Message -----
From: "mike burke"
Sent: Friday, September 27, 2002 2:56 PM
Subject: Democracy Now Exclusive: Survey Shows
Congress Overwhelmed w/ Anti-War Calls


*** DEMOCRACY NOW EXCLUSIVE ***

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
September 27, 2002


CONGRESS OVERWHELMED WITH ANTI-WAR CALLS FROM
"THE
SILENCED MAJORITY"

Republican and Democratic Senate offices report
"overwhelming" opposition from their constituents
to war with Iraq. This comes as Congress prepares to
pass a war resolution granting President Bush sweeping
powers to invade Iraq.

The national news radio show Democracy Now!
conducted an informal survey on Thursday of 70 Republican
and Democratic Senate offices.

Of the 26 offices which responded to our
inquires, 22 reported an overwhelming majority - in some cases
up to 99 percent -- of constituents opposed war in
Iraq;
three said the response was split and just one
office Among the findings:

Democrats
* Wisconsin Sen. Herb Kohl: Aides say they are
receiving 1,000-2,000 calls per week with the
overwhelming number opposed to an attack on Iraq.

* Washington Sen. Patty Murray: Over 5,000
letters and
phone calls were received last week on Iraq,
aides
say. Only about 100 came from constituents who
supported an attack.

* California Sen. Dianne Feinstein: Staff in her
San
Francisco office reported about 200 calls a day
with 99 percent of the callers opposing the war.

* New Mexico Sen. Jeff Bingaman: The D.C. office
has been receiving at least 1,300 calls a day with
about 70 percent opposed to war.

Republicans
* North Carolina Jesse Helms: Staff declined to
give figures but said the "majority is against" when
it comes to calls on Iraq.

* Nebraska Charles Hegal: According to aides,
constituents favor diplomacy over war at a rate
of 5 to 1.

* Virginia John Warner: About 150 constituents a
day are calling into the D.C. offices. "A very small
minority supported military action," said one
aide.

"It's extraordinary that, as Senators work with
the Bush Administration to draft a war resolution,
their constituents are expressing overwhelming
opposition an attack against Iraq," said Amy Goodman, the host
of Democracy Now! "Unfortunately we are hearing very
little about this in the media. These calls
represent the silenced majority, not the silent majority."

Democracy Now is a daily nationwide news show
based in New York. It is broadcast on over 130 public
radio and television stations around the country.

Listen to the Democracy Now report at:

<http://www.webactive.com/pacifica/demnow/dn2002092>
7.html

For more information visit:
<http://www.democracynow.org>"


<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NucNews/message/7093>

Hey Kathaksung! Welcome to DA!

Your first post is a pretty good one!

Lets here it for the silenced majority!
:)

So basically, what you're saying, is that of the people who have nothing better to do than call their senator, the majority are against war. What about the rest of us, who are too busy working, and hoping the government will do something to stop terrorism? If the middle east is a stained glass parking lot, there will be no more arab terrorists.

I was very surprised to find Congressman Chris Shays using technology for voting citizens to indicate their opinion on various issues. As the unibomber manifesto dictates, the US government hesitates to implement technology for the advantage of voters because that may empower them more. The government of course uses technology to empower themselves over the voters. For example, public school classes should be on CD-ROM or DVD so parents can see what is going on. The government school prefers to keep that secret.



From Congressman Chris Shays' site:

1. Do you think the U.S. is justified in attacking Iraq to prevent Saddam Hussein from using biological, chemical, radioactive or nuclear weapons against the U.S.?

Yes (29.64%)
No (66.35%)
Not Sure (4%)

Total Responses: 425


Edit: This is bizarre. Why would my Congressman be going to Israel rather than say, Zimbabwe to tell that genicidal, racist, savage mass murderer Robert Mugabe to lighten up on the killing of Caucasiods? Maybe Binjamin has some important information to give Chris to prevent further terrorism in the US. :rolleyes:

...Shays will visit Israel August 25 through August 27, in his capacity as Chairman of the National Security Subcommittee. Shays is scheduled to meet with former Prime Ministers Benjamin Netanyahu and Ehud Barak and current government ministers to discuss the ongoing war on terrorism. Shays will also visit Hebrew University in Jerusalem to meet with the University's President, faculty and students, and Hadassah Ein Kerem Hospital in Jerusalem.

Originally posted by QtrHrsmn
So basically, what you're saying, is that of the people who have nothing better to do than call their senator, the majority are against war. What about the rest of us, who are too busy working, and hoping the government will do something to stop terrorism? If the middle east is a stained glass parking lot, there will be no more arab terrorists.
:rolleyes: I don't mean this as a flame alex, but that's a crock. If you have time to paruse silly (but wonderful) internet boards like DA, you have time to make a 3 minute phone call in order to actually participate in how the country you live in is run. I'm not saying what the opinion of callers should be, but your judgement of those that have made the call is completely unfounded.

Originally posted by igofast

:rolleyes: I don't mean this as a flame alex, but that's a crock. If you have time to paruse silly (but wonderful) internet boards like DA, you have time to make a 3 minute phone call in order to actually participate in how the country you live in is run. I'm not saying what the opinion of callers should be, but your judgement of those that have made the call is completely unfounded. I have contacted my representatives before. I will when I feel the situation warrants it. But to call to whine about something that hasn't happened, that Bush's predecessor brought us to with his lackluster performance, just serves to reinforce the need for electing representatives that are more in tune with your philosophy. I personally think we SHOULD be the most powerful nation on earth, and AS such have a responsibility to put a stop to ANY and ALL aggression towards our country, in ANY method it takes. Turn Iraq into a colony? Great! Force them to improve their citizen's living conditions? GREAT! Take from the oil barons to give better facilities to their own people? I'm all for it! It's hard to be jealous when you have the same things everyone else has. So, calling to whine about war like some kind of 60's flower child? GET REAL.

Originally posted by QtrHrsmn
If the middle east is a stained glass parking lot, there will be no more arab terrorists.

Gee, thats brilliant.

Originally posted by QtrHrsmn
I have contacted my representatives before. I will when I feel the situation warrants it. But to call to whine about something that hasn't happened, [quote]

So we should 'whine' or complain AFTER we go to war? That kind of defeats the purpose Alex. Thats like me saying 'why do peolpe want to bomb Iraq for something that has yet to happen.' (if they use a wmd)

[quote]that Bush's predecessor brought us to with his lackluster performance, just serves to reinforce the need for electing representatives that are more in tune with your philosophy.
So you're talking about George Bush Sr.? Or what abotu Reagan, and how he propped up Sadam, supplied him with weapons, intelligence, and gave him capabilities he has today? What about how they did that and dind't remove him?

I personally think we SHOULD be the most powerful nation on earth, and AS such have a responsibility to put a stop to ANY and ALL aggression towards our country, in ANY method it takes.

Does only the most powerful nation get that right, or does any nation? Perhaps is that the reasoning islamic terrorists use?

Turn Iraq into a colony? Great! Force them to improve their citizen's living conditions? GREAT! Take from the oil barons to give better facilities to their own people? I'm all for it! It's hard to be jealous when you have the same things everyone else has.

So what stops us/me from stealing from the rich and giving to the poor in this country? I mean, the rationale you're using is just so one sided and so...ridiculous.

[quote]So, calling to whine about war like some kind of 60's flower child? GET REAL.

Or perhaps one could say 'its great that young people especially are taking an interest in their power and ability to mold and shape government

So you're talking about George Bush Sr.? Or what abotu Reagan, and how he propped up Sadam, supplied him with weapons, intelligence, and gave him capabilities he has today? What about how they did that and dind't remove him

Reagan didn't have the balls to go into Iran and settle with them.
Saddam was a willing subject. Of course, all Saddams real hardware was supplied by his good friends the commies..as they still support him in any way possible today.

Does only the most powerful nation get that right, or does any nation? Perhaps is that the reasoning islamic terrorists use?

Isalmic terrorists are serfs to Egyptian ideology. They hardly think for themselves.

Or perhaps one could say 'its great that young people especially are taking an interest in their power and ability to mold and shape government

The mold and shape has been caste. Its only a matter of choosing sides.

So...now I'm not very good at math...but according to the article, about 10,000 people make up 99% of congress' constituents? :confused:

Originally posted by RedLine99
The mold and shape has been caste. Its only a matter of choosing sides.
Do you see that as a problem? I do.

Vox-pop samples like this are statistically useless, as only the people with extreme views use their voice.

Originally posted by QtrHrsmn
If the middle east is a stained glass parking lot, there will be no more arab terrorists.

If you annihilated the Middle East with nuclear weapons, I for one would dedicate my life to bringing just a tiny, little bit of the genocidal murder, the pain, that you inflicted back upon you.

No more Arab terrorists, yes, but many more from the rest of the world.

Originally posted by RedLine99
Reagan didn't have the balls to go into Iran and settle with them.
Saddam was a willing subject. Of course, all Saddams real hardware was supplied by his good friends the commies..as they still support him in any way possible today.


What Commies would these be? And, is it just me, or was the USSR backing Iran, not Iraq?

Originally posted by JoeyNormal


If you annihilated the Middle East with nuclear weapons, I for one would dedicate my life to bringing just a tiny, little bit of the genocidal murder, the pain, that you inflicted back upon you.



Joey, didnt you say you werre going to do that anyway? Something about a secret oath to do so?

Originally posted by JoeyNormal


What Commies would these be? And, is it just me, or was the USSR backing Iran, not Iraq?

I understand you were only 6 or 7 years old during that conflict. I'm sure all the pictures available to you are american planes bombing Iragi civilians. The books you read have probably been changed to reflect the entire event as an american imperialist excursion. Enjoy your slavery.

Originally posted by igofast

Do you see that as a problem? I do.

Sometimes. More so when I see lack of respect of what we do have and could be.

Originally posted by JoeyNormal


I for one would dedicate my life to bringing just a tiny, little bit of the genocidal murder, the pain, that you inflicted back upon you.



Do you prefer "Terrorist in Training, JoeyNormal"?

or, "Aspiring Terrorist, JoeyNormal"?

Originally posted by JoeyNormal
No more Arab terrorists, yes, but many more from the rest of the world.

You and the rest of the commies can bring it on.

Originally posted by QtrHrsmn
If the middle east is a stained glass parking lot, there will be no more arab terrorists.

I'm not anti war by any means .... I'm pro US interest whaere ever that may be.

I wonder if we do not go after Iraq and he does build some nukes.... and eventually one of them will be used against Israel (is there really any doubt about that?) ... by either him or Arafat’s cronies what the outcome will be. .... I'd be willing to bet that between Israel and the rest of the Mideast if the US does not get involved than that whole region will become a stained glass parking lot (they WILL nuke each other to bits). If the US does get involved (we will) then all the blame will fall on us for the war (mostly from the ignorant; that have no idea) … but at least the area will be livable for the next 10,000 years. Saddam may try his chances in a nuke war with Israel (I think he would, and he’d have the backing of most of the other states too) …. But if the US is involved he probably (they) will not see that as an option, We bankrupted the Russians by building all kinds of neato stuff … that stuff is still laying around and they know it. ….. Desert storm was a bitch slap compared to the capabilities of the US armed forces; they know it and our “interest” in the region is probably the only reason they haven’t wiped themselves off the map. ….. You ever pay attention to how ants go to war? … They gauge their opponents and will only fight each other if both sides think they have an advantage (of course one side still looses though) …. If one side is clearly unbeatable, they do not go to war (not that day … not until the weak side thinks they have gotten strong enough to fight).

Oh well, I probably sound like I’m rambling … not conveying my thoughts real good today.

Originally posted by JoeyNormal


What Commies would these be? And, is it just me, or was the USSR backing Iran, not Iraq? Dude, ALL the hardware in Iraq Desert Storm was communist bloc issue. From the rifles to the tanks.

Originally posted by Cosmo
Joey, didnt you say you werre going to do that anyway? Something about a secret oath to do so?

I swore to myself that I would dedicate my life to improving society and helping people, be that through individual charity or revolutionery politics.

There is a vast difference between that and...this. My point is simple; if you nuked the Middle East out of existence, you would see a tide of hatred from the rest of the world. The attacks you would suffer would make 9/11 look puny.

And you would deserve every one. Murder is evil. Genocide worse. Nuclear genocide...

Originally posted by DngrMse
Do you prefer "Terrorist in Training, JoeyNormal"?

or, "Aspiring Terrorist, JoeyNormal"?

Haha. Brilliant. I notice how much more reaction this gets compared to the suggestion that you nuke the entire Middle East. Why would that be, I wonder?

Originally posted by RedLine99
You and the rest of the commies can bring it on.

Excuse me? Could you please explain the link between Communism and not liking the ****ing genocidal use of nuclear weapons to annihilate an entire section of the globe.

Originally posted by JoeyNormal


Haha. Brilliant. I notice how much more reaction this gets compared to the suggestion that you nuke the entire Middle East. Why would that be, I wonder?

I'd be more interested in some details of your original threat. Who are the targets going to be? What method of attacks do you plan on using? That sort'a thing. We can talk about nuking the ME some other time, perhaps.

Originally posted by RedLine99
I understand you were only 6 or 7 years old during that conflict. I'm sure all the pictures available to you are american planes bombing Iragi civilians. The books you read have probably been changed to reflect the entire event as an american imperialist excursion. Enjoy your slavery.

Six.

The books I have read. What have I seen? The burnt out shells of tanks. The Iraqi corpses. The brilliant American war machine marching off to yet another stunning victory.

But then...I look deeper. I see that the invasion of Kuwait - amazingly - was not merely a mad land-grab, but a motivated oil-grab condoned by key figures in the US State Department. Naturally, your books omit this. Welcome to your slavery.

Originally posted by JoeyNormal


I swore to myself that I would dedicate my life to improving society and helping people, be that through individual charity or revolutionery politics.

There is a vast difference between that and...this. My point is simple; if you nuked the Middle East out of existence, you would see a tide of hatred from the rest of the world. The attacks you would suffer would make 9/11 look puny.

And you would deserve every one. Murder is evil. Genocide worse. Nuclear genocide...

Sure. Just like the 'tide of hatred' following the successful conclusion to the second world war? I could live with that.

Originally posted by DngrMse
I'd be more interested in some details of your original threat. Who are the targets going to be? What method of attacks do you plan on using? That sort'a thing. We can talk about nuking the ME some other time, perhaps.

Okay. Firstly I would find a cadre of like-minded inviduals. I would take a page from Al Queda's book and hijack aircraft. I would land them and release all passengers, but would keep hostages at another site as safety, releasing them once the planes were in the air. I would also place vehicles packed with explosives at multiple intersections throughout DC. I would converge the aircraft here, and localise the attacks into one city. Once the planes were in the air, I would broadcast my intentions to the world and suggest everyone leaves Washington as fast as is humanly possible.

Or, o'course, I would join the NZ army and, along with the rest of the world, remove nuclear capabilities from that unstable madman Bush :|

Originally posted by JoeyNormal


Six.

The books I have read. What have I seen? The burnt out shells of tanks. The Iraqi corpses. The brilliant American war machine marching off to yet another stunning victory.

But then...I look deeper. I see that the invasion of Kuwait - amazingly - was not merely a mad land-grab, but a motivated oil-grab condoned by key figures in the US State Department. Naturally, your books omit this. Welcome to your slavery. I don't have to read about the Gulf war, I was old enough to remember. I have many friends that were there. So go preach your crap about that one to somebody else. :mad:

Originally posted by DngrMse
Sure. Just like the 'tide of hatred' following the successful conclusion to the second world war? I could live with that.

There is a huge difference. Surely you can see that?

Originally posted by jwreck
I don't have to read about the Gulf war, I was old enough to remember. I have many friends that were there. So go preach your crap about that one to somebody else. :mad:

What crap? I do not believe the soldiers were "evil". What I do believe is that they were deployed in an unjust conflict caused primarily by errors in American foreign policy.

Originally posted by jwreck
Dude, ALL the hardware in Iraq Desert Storm was communist bloc issue. From the rifles to the tanks.

Odd. This was likely during the Soviets' final last-ditch "ohshit, were starving...but our armies huge" phase, when they began to sell weapons to anyone and everyone.

However, I know that they possessed US weapons, so I would assume that they used them.

Believe what you want. Exactly how was it unjust? Do you know the kinds of things the Iraquis were doing to the Kuwaitis before the US got there?

Originally posted by jwreck
Believe what you want. Exactly how was it unjust? Do you know the kinds of things the Iraquis were doing to the Kuwaitis before the US got there?

Doesn't matter to the unNormal types...they will just say we showed how it was done.

Originally posted by JoeyNormal
Excuse me? Could you please explain the link between Communism and not liking the ****ing genocidal use of nuclear weapons to annihilate an entire section of the globe.

It's rather obvious you have a brief perception of history. (If any perception at all)...oh wait, the Cold War was about Americans going to nuke the world...:o

Originally posted by JoeyNormal


If you annihilated the Middle East with nuclear weapons, I for one would dedicate my life to bringing just a tiny, little bit of the genocidal murder, the pain, that you inflicted back upon you.

No more Arab terrorists, yes, but many more from the rest of the world.

LOL. You are a loudmouthed joke.

The good news is you have managed to get on a watch list if Carnivore actually works.

Originally posted by hammegk
LOL. You are a loudmouthed joke.

The good news is you have managed to get on a watch list if Carnivore actually works.

I have been on that list for a long time. I was a member of http://www.raisethefist.com ;)

Originally posted by RedLine99
It's rather obvious you have a brief perception of history. (If any perception at all)...oh wait, the Cold War was about Americans going to nuke the world...:o

I am currently first in my school in history. My mark in the last exam was 86%, in the previous, 89%. Second in both was 76%. Overall, I am roughly 10% ahead of second place, guaranteeing me a "One" for my Sixth Form Certificate mark, thereby placing myself in at least the top 2% of students in NZ for this subject.

I gain the marks I do in this subject as it genuinely interests me, so I read books on history outside of class, and I ensure that I read both "sides". To call me brainwashed is to admit that you know nothing about me.

My perception of history is perefectly fine. I would even suggest that it may be superior to your own, although I do not know you sufficiently well to judge

The Cold War was not about any such thing, and I would never declare it to be such.

Night everybody!

This party's over.