[LINK] {OT} Walk against War - sunday in sydney

[Damien Miller]

Grant Bayley wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Feb 2003, Damien Miller wrote:
> 
>>I didn't see any "dictating" going on at the rally on Friday eve - I
>>suppose this is just an emotive word that you use to make your point
>>stronger.
>>
>>The "other" 19m are quite entitled to start pro-war rallies, but I can
>>only surmise from their absence that they they (partially) agree with
>>the 400k or they don't care enough to attend either.
> 
> See this is what I don't get.
> 
> They didn't turn up, but they agree with the 400k?

That's not at all what I said.

> How exactly can you justify this statement?

Well, as I mentioned - you are quite welcome to start a pro-war rally. I 
suspect that you will not have many attendees. It might even be a good 
experiment - maybe you should give it a go.

>>I have seen the opinion polls show that over 60% of Australians do not
>>want a war without UN approval, and a sizable minority do not want war
>>under any circumstances. You may choose to ignore them, but these
>>numbers have been remarkably durable for something as typically fickle
>>as public opinion.
> 
> Which numbers are we talking about exactly?  The ones that will go along
> if the UN authorises it?  Or the ones that don't want it at all?  They're
> two separate groups, are they not?
 >
> It would seem convenient and expedient for your side to blur the lines
> between the two, to my way of thinking.

It was very clear from the above that I was referring to both. Please 
reread what I wrote and stop attempting to twist people's words to suit 
your particular world-view.

> Which of these two groups are you in, Damien?

I don't think that this is relevant to this discussion, but I am 
somewhere between "OK if the UN says it is" and "no war."

-d