Funferal

Saturday protests

Since I was at the MCLLM this week, I was unable to attend the weekly protest on North Prospect Avenue, which I had otherwise have done. I was there last week (I must admit it was my first time) and found it a generally positive, if occasionally bewildering, experience. With several hundred pro-peace people present it’s an interesting place, with a variety of views presented. There’s also a pro-war group down the road, but the two don’t mix (except for when they drive past standing in the back of jeeps with signs saying “bombing is good” or some such…).
Quite a few passing drivers were supportive – it seemed to me that in the range of one in every five or six cars either honked or waved peace signs. However, it was some of the shouts from the ‘other side’ that were most interesting. One motorist started a debate, and on being told “this is an illegal war” retorted with “how can a war be illegal?” While I sympathise with him on one level – war seems so extraordinary that it is difficult to see it falling under a legal framework – the comment also reflects an ignorance of the debates which have been central to the global debate.
There was an interesting exchange with a guy who claimed “you need war to have peace” – the old ‘soldiers are the true poets’ argument. His wording was just too close to Orwell’s mantra to be funny.
The real beauty, though, came from a guy who claimed that it was OK to bomb Baghdad because “anyone there is stupid and deserves to be bombed – anyone who’s smart already left.” There’s just so much wrong with this. Is this bringing Blair’s concept of a meritocracy to a new level? – Fail an IQ test, get killed by a cluster bomb? And that’s ignoring the fact that the attack, by this logic, becomes self-sustaining. It truly is a case of destroying the village to save it – anyone there is our enemy, because they are standing in the way of our liberating them.
Oh, and yeah: there’s just something about a woman in her 70s giving the finger that’s just a little obscene.