Friday, November 21, 2003
It's not sounding too good out there on the protest front. No one but a few die-hards wants to show up for a protest. A massive "event" helps to attract the regular folks who don't make a profession of protesting, so all of the fauning media coverage crowing over expected "massive" crowds could not have failed to add to the totals. Yet, in spite of what amounts to massive publicity from all the major news outlets and calls from major politicians, the crowd was pretty measly considering it took place in the middle of a huge population center. As an aside, did even one of the major outlets (BBC, AP, Reuters, ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN...) mention anything about the background of the organizers of these events?
...If this was the best the capital city could do on the first day of the visit, it didn’t bode well for Thursday, the day of the main protest. Stop The War estimated some 200,000 people took part in anti-American demonstrations, many of them middle class. Official sources – those without a partisan axe to grind – tell a different story. Scotland Yard estimated 70,000 people. However, London’s Metropolitan Police figured the number of participants at only 30,000, nearly none of whom were middle class. In other words, not only did Stop the War overestimate its crowd by between 130,000 and 170,000 people, but the middle classes occupied themselves as they usually do, by going to work. Thus, the protests were pulled off by the usual suspects: leftist malcontents, Islamists, a few college students up for a laugh, full-time protesters and unemployed losers, the typical flotsam and jetsam that finds itself with spare time and a grudge to bear during the day in the middle of the work week. They were joined by truant schoolchildren, whose teachers looked the other way, and a few retirees -- at least, STW claims there were retirees present...