Poor Code Pink

[ScottSA]

These silly spoiled women who like to dress in pink and do whatever one wants to call the things they do in the name of "peace" seem to feel now that they're above the law. They apparently attempted to come up here to spread sedition, and our border guards said no. Now they're trying to whip up a tizzy in their ever-dwindling band of followers because they "find it unacceptable" that we won't let criminals in. This from a CP email I just got. I'm sure it's on their website as well:

"Canada used to be a haven for peace activists during the Vietnam era, a place where Americans could go to escape the madness of war. No longer.

On October 4, 2007, CODEPINK co-founder Medea Benjamin and Retired Colonel/ diplomat Ann Wright were denied entry to Canada because they have engaged in acts of non-violent civil disobedience against the war in Iraq. The Canadian border officials said the women's names appeared on the FBI's National Crime Information Center (NCIC) database, and anyone convicted of a criminal offense, including a minor misdemeanor for peace and social justice, was "inadmissible." This, to us, is unacceptable. We can't sit back and watch our civil liberties erode, one by one. We can't sit back and let peace activists be treated like dangerous criminals..."

Actually, I think that traitoresses and seditionists should be treated as rather worse than criminals, but hey, that's just me.

Edited October 12, 2007 by ScottSA

[margrace]

These silly women want to bring their children back from the slaughter in Iraq, until you arrogant men have experienced child birth your opinions are pretty stupid.

[ScottSA]

These silly women want to bring their children back from the slaughter in Iraq, until you arrogant men have experienced child birth your opinions are pretty stupid.

I'm trying to find something marginally sequitous to respond to here. Speaking only for one arrogant man, I have kids too, you know. They don't actually stay in childbirth.

Edited October 12, 2007 by ScottSA

[kuzadd]

what an embarrassment for Canada.!

Totally politically motivated, a misdemeanor 50$ fine, gets someone on the FBI list??????

Only in that bastion of freedom to the south of us.

Then Canada displays an amount of stupidity, that is beyond pale, buy actually not showing any independence or common sense.

[M.Dancer]

This from a CP email I just got.

Aeonflux put you on her mailing list?

[Drea]

denied entry to Canada because they have engaged in acts of non-violent civil disobedience against the war in Iraq.

The Canadian border officials said the women's names appeared on the FBI's National Crime Information Center (NCIC) database, and anyone convicted of a criminal offense, including a minor misdemeanor for peace and social justice, was "inadmissible."

So disagreeing with the government makes one a criminal?

So being a NON violent protester gets one a criminal record these days?

So wanting the soldiers home is cause for the government to put people on "watch lists".

Frig.

Good thing there are lots of sane Americans going to be voting in 08.

[Canadian Blue]

Actually, I think that traitoresses and seditionists should be treated as rather worse than criminals, but hey, that's just me.

So, are you enlisting your children in the Marine Corps?

However it's interesting how anyone who criticizes government policy should be considered a traitor, by that reasoning we could lock millions of people in Canada.

Edited October 12, 2007 by Canadian Blue

[old_bold&cold]

I am not so sure how I feel on this. while I think that they probably could get into some sort of trouble up here, protesting etc.. I do not see that keeping them away is a problem either. As they have criminal records, yes they are unwanted here. Just as anyone caught with a DUI would be refused entry. But is it a mitigating factor that they are peace activists? No not really. While their cause may be ok in some minds, it still is protesting, while an armed conflict is in progress that their soldiers are in. So it is not all black and white as to say this is a small thing. Were they coming here to rally's and protests. If so then deny then entry for sure. We have enough home grown protesters here, without taking in foreign ones. I guess it is a good thing, that when we are in doubt about how to go on this, it is better to refuse entry, then grant it and be sorry afterwards.

[guyser]

We are free to deny entry to anyone we want , and if their name is on the FBI NCIC database then they will be denied entry. Good for us, we have that right.How the name got there is for the injured party to decide and or attempt to amend.

However , it seems a double standard exists here. But since these are women, and they are protesting against something the OP thinks is silly then it is okay.

These silly spoiled women who like to dress in pink and do whatever one wants to call the things they do in the name of "peace" seem to feel now that they're above the law. They apparently attempted to come up here to spread sedition, and our border guards said no. Now they're trying to whip up a tizzy in their ever-dwindling band of followers because they "find it unacceptable" that we won't let criminals in. This from a CP email I just got. I'm sure it's on their website as well:

"Canada used to be a haven for peace activists during the Vietnam era, a place where Americans could go to escape the madness of war. No longer.

Sedition is a close call since sedition implies insurrection against the established order and insurrection is an "armed uprising , or revolt against an established civil or political authority" (wiki...yes wiki)

But traitors they were not.Thats pure conjecture on someones part. They neither took up arms against nor helped the enemy now did they?They did not attempt to overthrow the US govt did they?

Anyhow, they were prostesting. It seems that they were protesting against the War in Iraq.

How is their protest any different than some Belgian politicians protesting against Islam? The Belgians did not have a permit even though they tried, but were denied.So they openly defied the town govt and got arrested. T'was okay with you then , but now that it is the silly pink ones protesting and one get the knickers in a knot. As you opined above , "they think they are above the law"....exactly like the Belgian politicians were, which you agreed with.

What a double standard.

On October 4, 2007, CODEPINK co-founder Medea Benjamin and Retired Colonel/ diplomat Ann Wright were denied entry to Canada because they have engaged in acts of non-violent civil disobedience against the war in Iraq. The Canadian border officials said the women's names appeared on the FBI's National Crime Information Center (NCIC) database, and anyone convicted of a criminal offense, including a minor misdemeanor for peace and social justice, was "inadmissible." This, to us, is unacceptable. We can't sit back and watch our civil liberties erode, one by one. We can't sit back and let peace activists be treated like dangerous criminals..."

All well and good. It is the way it works, and should work. It does suck getting on that list and being denied , but so many things from ones past can put you on any list for denial that this is SOP.

Actually, I think that traitoresses and seditionists should be treated as rather worse than criminals, but hey, that's just me.

Actually no you dont. You just like being a hypocrite when it suits you. Protest against Islam , all cool.

Be pink and protest the war and you want something along the lines of death.

[fellowtraveller]

These silly women want to bring their children back from the slaughter in Iraq, until you arrogant men have experienced child birth your opinions are pretty stupid.

I feel the need to point out yet again that the joining the American military is 100% voluntary. Going to war when you are part of the military should not come as a big surprise to anybody, including mothers.

So, are you enlisting your children in the Marine Corps?

Cannot be done. You have to be 18 to enlist, legally an adult. You cannot enlist somebody else anyway.

[Wilber]

The only people who have a right to enter Canada are Canadian citizens.

[godzilla]

ah yes, civil disobedience now a serious crime in the good ol usa!

read your history books my friend... for that matter there are plenty of other countries that you would chose not to live in where the same rules apply.

funny how some people are so against doing whatever big government says... and yet telling other people that they must abide by the rules?

[ScottSA]

ah yes, civil disobedience now a serious crime in the good ol usa!

read your history books my friend... for that matter there are plenty of other countries that you would chose not to live in where the same rules apply.

funny how some people are so against doing whatever big government says... and yet telling other people that they must abide by the rules?

I suspect I've read at least as many history books as you, and the concept of "civil disobedience can mean many things. My understanding of this woman's "civil disobedience" is that she chains herself to every availble lamp-post, or alternatively lies down in every available road, as lonf as it causes stress to people, and has a fair bit of a record for doing it. She's also on record ranting a whack of anti-American rhetoric, and I'd be very surprised if she wasn't on an FBI list during wartime. Mosley was too, in Britain during WW II, and I don't imagine you would have complained about that. Further, there are degrees of "repression." If you had some experience with other countries, you'd be able to distinguish between, say, Amin's Uganda and Bush's US. Putting someone on a list for the perusal of a neighbour is hardly equivalent to taking someone into a field and shooting them.

[guyser]

I suspect I've read at least as many history books as you, and the concept of "civil disobedience can mean many things. My understanding of this woman's "civil disobedience" is that she chains herself to every availble lamp-post, or alternatively lies down in every available road, as lonf as it causes stress to people, and has a fair bit of a record for doing it.

In other words the Code Pinks were doing civil disobedience and were arrested for it.

Same as the Belgian politicians.

But one gets a pass from you , the others dont.

Just wanted to make sure the flip flop existed.

[godzilla]

Further, there are degrees of "repression." If you had some experience with other countries, you'd be able to distinguish between, say, Amin's Uganda and Bush's US. Putting someone on a list for the perusal of a neighbour is hardly equivalent to taking someone into a field and shooting them.

"Civil disobedience is the active refusal to obey certain laws, demands and commands of a government or of an occupying power without resorting to physical violence."

and it is a conerstone of our libertarian democracy. it should be respected at all times because the next government may want something _you_ don't want to do and you'll want people to respect _you_!

i think what is important here is that someones ability (and most of us consider it a 'right') to travel has been hampered because of their opinions! and put on a secret list that those persons probably were unaware of and have no recourse over!

[ScottSA]

In other words the Code Pinks were doing civil disobedience and were arrested for it.

Same as the Belgian politicians.

But one gets a pass from you , the others dont.

Just wanted to make sure the flip flop existed.

When exactly was Code Pink beaten up and carted off in police vans for peacefully assembling?

[ScottSA]

"Civil disobedience is the active refusal to obey certain laws, demands and commands of a government or of an occupying power without resorting to physical violence."

and it is a conerstone of our libertarian democracy. it should be respected at all times because the next government may want something _you_ don't want to do and you'll want people to respect _you_!

i think what is important here is that someones ability (and most of us consider it a 'right') to travel has been hampered because of their opinions! and put on a secret list that those persons probably were unaware of and have no recourse over!

Neither the US nor Canada has a libertarian democracy, and civil disobedience most certainly isn't a cornerstone of anything but civil disobedience.

[godzilla]

Neither the US nor Canada has a libertarian democracy...

dosen't this whole thread prove just that! well said!

my premise was that while the idea of 'liberty' may be a wash at the moment that it _is_ a desire of both of our cultures!?

"Libertarianism is a political philosophy that upholds the principle of individual liberty. Libertarians maintain that all persons are the absolute owners of their own lives, and should be free to do whatever they wish with their persons or property, provided they allow others the same liberty."

"Liberal democracy is a form of government. It is a representative democracy in which the ability of the elected representatives to exercise decision-making power is subject to the rule of law, and usually moderated by a constitution that emphasizes the protection of the rights and freedoms of individuals, and which places constraints on the leaders and on the extent to which the will of the majority can be exercised against the rights of minorities (see civil liberties)."

[Canadian Blue]

ScottSA, since you called Codepink traitors what type of punishment would like to hand down to them?

[ScottSA]

QUOTE(ScottSA @ Oct 12 2007, 02:38 PM)

Neither the US nor Canada has a libertarian democracy...

dosen't this whole thread prove just that! well said!

I don't think thread needs to be consulted on that question. Try the US constitution.

[geoffrey]

We have no obligation to let convicted criminals into Canada. These women need to stop complaining. It's not their country, they don't vote or pay taxes here. Go back to where they came from and protest there.

Why would we want people that promote civil disorder in Canada?

[jefferiah]

Hmmmm....

It seems that their entry to Canada has been banned over very little.

Any more information on what the civil disobedience was?

[jefferiah]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_Pink

"On September 21, 2006, Code Pink staged a peace march which blocked traffic on the Golden Gate Bridge. Code Pink received permits allowing them to march after the morning commute hours at 10:00am. Instead, the group illegally began walking toward the center of the span as early as 7:30am. They left by 10:00am with no injuries or accidents reported.[7]"

"On March 22, 2007 several Code Pink protestors were arrested outside the office of Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi after announcing their intent to take over the office. Code Pink was protesting that the majority Democratic party had not stopped war funding.[10]"

Holding up traffic on a bridge and attempting to take over an office......

Well, that may be reason enough.

"Code Pink has been the subject of criticism for the protests it has held at military hospitals, most notably at the Walter Reed Medical Center in Washington, DC."

That's pretty tasteless.

[scribblet]

Sounds like Canada had good reason not to let them in.

And yes, the U.S. army is ALL volunteer, do these women not know that or do they just willfully ignore it?

[Argus]

In other words the Code Pinks were doing civil disobedience and were arrested for it.

Same as the Belgian politicians.

Do I really need to point out the difference to you between people who were refused permission to demonstrate at all because their views were deemed offensive, and people who were dissatisfied with mere protest and insisted on throwing themselves in front of traffic or chaining themselves to the doors of buildings to prevent people from going through?

Living in Ottawa, I've had some experience with this sort, and I can tell you that when they're illegally blocking a major artery and causing chaos the only thing motorists want is for the police to move out of the way so we can run over their sorry, raggedy asses.

You have a right to protest (except in Belgium) but you do not have a right to force others to listen. Is that clear enough?