© n/a
Are the worldwide protests helping or hurting? That is the question.
As Alexander Haig once stated "they can protest all they want so long as they pay their taxes". This statement is pretty telling in my opinion.
Now accompany that statement with the question, has protesting and hitting the streets
really brought any change in policy, banking, wars etc.? Unfortunately, the answer clearly is no.
Let us take a look at some examples:
The Civil Rights MovementThe civil rights movement was a political movement for equality. Between 1950 and 1980 the movement took the form of campaigns of civil resistance.
The aim was to achieve change by means of nonviolent forms of resistance. But the campaign of "nonviolent forms of resistance" was accompanied, or followed, by civil unrest. In some cases armed rebellion.
When one thinks "civil rights movement" a few things probably comes to mind right away. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., Rosa Parks, sit-ins, and the hosing of black demonstrators, just to name a few.
I have a lot of respect for Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., Rosa Parks and the numerous students that stood tall against oppression.
I want to make clear that I am questioning the effectiveness of demonstrating/protesting to bring about change. I am in no way saying that these individuals are "dumb" for the actions they took against oppression.
Comment: It's always nice to see the mainstream media continuing to promote blatant lies about Iran's 'nukes' and ignore the copious evidence that the West is convinced that Iran is not building nuclear bombs.
It's also nice to see the mainstream media ignore the obvious logic that a nuclear-armed Iran would be a threat to no one, least of all Israel, given that Israel possesses upwards of 400 nuclear weapons and could easily destroy Iran.
Perhaps the problem is that the mainstream media has somehow forgotten that 45 years of 'cold war' between the US and the Soviet Union proved conclusively that MAD - Mutually Assured Destruction - is a sure safeguard against nuclear war. Of course, Israel would say that the Iranians are so crazy that they would accept their own annihilation just to launch one nuke at Israel, but again, there is no evidence whatsoever for such a ridiculous contention.
In short, the real 'fear' here is that Iran with a nuclear capability would act as a bulwark against Israeli and US hegemony and off-the-leash criminality and murder in the Middle East. That's why Iran "must be stopped", because Israel wants to remain the economic and military top dog on the block.