in thinking Anti war protesters should not have protested outside a memorial service today?

[mamazon]

went to an Armistace service today. my brother is in the sea cadets and so was marching but we go each year to pay our respects to both family members and those who we have never met but who have given us so much.

anyway i was so proud of DS. he asked lots of questions and he seemed to really take in why were there.

when we came out of teh church there were a group of about 20 anti war protestors, with plackards and banners.
they waited until the laying of wreaths before they started shouting and hollering.

I was utterly disgusted buy them. i was so angry i had tears in my eye. there were veterens there who were clearly upset by this display of ignorance.

I do not believe we shoudl still have troops in Iraq but today is not about War it is about respect for those who have given their lives in teh name of our country and all of us who live here.

im sorry but it really did make me so angry.

thanks edam, at least someone here supports freedom of speech.

I didn't say she did! I was contrasting what Mamazon said (troll) with what Yummers said (words of one syllable).

What is the point of MN if people start yelling 'troll' as soon as someone disagrees? Yummers may have a minority opinion, but she's as entitled to her POV as anyone else, without people claming her opinion is so irrational she must be troll.

im happy to debate any subject Edam (as is shown on various threads at the mo ) but i really do feel Yummers has been deliberatly provocative in her remarks on this thread in order to incite a reaction.

it doesn't seem to me that yummers wants a debate, she wants to resort to insulting and offensive posts.

if she posted anything i could debate with i will gladly respond but so far all we have seen is some very ill considered ramting that makes very little logic

time for bed.

agree re the trolling edam.

Nightynight, thanks, I think that was my Grandad's opinion. He'd seen too many young men who never returned from bombing missions to stomach the VIPs swanning around.

Freedom of speech is fine. Being disrespectful whilst you go about it isn't.

nightynight - i also find my stomach turn when i see the likes of Brown and Blair at memorial services looking all sombre.
when you see them on teh news thanking "our boys" over in iraq. when they speak of their sorrow at hearing of another soliders death.

how can they be sorry for the loss of their families if they are happy for yet more young men or women to die in a pointless war.

but as i have said, i really do feel that the rights or wrongs of the war in Iraq is totally different to the remembering of fallen soldiers

mamazon, it seems to me that by labelling all my posts irrational you avoid having to come up with anything logical or coherant to disagree with anything i've said.

the establishment set the frame though saggars so they effectively define what is respectful and what isnt.

ok mamazon,, maybe i'm missing a trick here. please do explain how these two things are completely different.

Fair point, Edam - but there doesn't seem to have been much rational debate from Yummers - although there has been swearing and patronising comments. Most posts have acknowledged lack of public support for the wars, have acknowledged the politicians part in the loss of life and acknowledged that protesting against war (but not at a memmorial service)is appropriate - so there has been plenty of reasoned debate.

I used to think that, mamazon, but years of establishment-orchestrated remembrance parades have made me somewhat more cynical.

yummers, I think a lot of people feel the same way, but it is sometimes difficult to say it. Especially when someone else is getting a pasting on mumsnet for voicing that view

?Nightynight

AFAIC it's disrespectful to protest at a memorial service. The 'establishment' ahs nothing to do with it. It's impolite in any circumstances.

ok so i swore once, it's hardly the crime of the century, and it is allowed on mumsnet.

saggars, the point is that remembrance day consists of a service BECAUSE thats how they design it!
It could equally well have a framework that included space for people who are anti war to remember their relatives by affirming their commitment against war. But it doesnt.

Yummers: "mamazon, it seems to me that by labelling all my posts irrational you avoid having to come up with anything logical or coherant to disagree with anything i've said."

I disagree strongly. Mamazon has posted logically and coherently. eg.:

"actually i think if there was an organised protest at no 10 today i think i would have gone and held a plackard.

i would have shouted about not allowing our veterens have died in vain. i would have chanted that they died for peace, not to allow us to send yet more young men to their death.

i would then have gone back to my great grandads picture and thanked him for being part of a war that has given me the right to attend such a protest.

there is a time and place for protests."

That pretty much sums up my feelings on the issue.

Yummers, perhaps you should look back on your own posts to see who is being insulting. You reported Mamazon to MN for saying you are trolling on this thread, and all the while you are being patronising and rude.

You can't just start yelling 'troll' because you think someone is being, in your opinion, rude or daft or stupid, though. Troll has a specific meaning and it is a very strong accusation.

Blimey, if we all called every poster who didn't meet our own internal set of quality criteria a troll, MN would be meaningless.

Exactly, saggar. This wasn't a memorial service with the national politicians responisble for the war present. This was a local memorial service, with veterans there who wanted to publicly remember their friends in dignity.

Protesting here will have had absolutely no effect whatsoever, other than to have caused offence, hurt and anger.

Is that really what they wanted to achieve?

No it doesn't. Because they are two separate things and the anti-war affirmation shouldn't take the focus away from remembering the loss of life. IMO.

I agree, mamazon- The cynicism of politicians at this event is quite sickening.
However, I think protesting to people who have actually been to war and are therefore probably more saddened over deaths in Iraq etc then we are seems strangely patronising and insensitive. My grandfather was part of the first surge of troops who liberated the concentration camps and it was so awful he never spoke aboout it. I thought of him today and it did bring a tear to my eye. I think if he was still alive and at a memorial service most of us in the familiy would sympathise with the anti war sentiment but would fail to comprehend why they chose to do it there and then.

millions of people have protested on hundreds of occasions since the beginning of the iraq war. it's hardly a new idea, and so far, peace protesters have changed precisely nothing.

can you really blame people who feel so passionately about something for making a controversial move out of quiet desperation?

the remembrance is too much linked with the forces, which means the military lobby though.

If people were remembering the dead and abhorring war, why should they find an anti war demonstration offensive? I think the real issue is between people who regard war as inevitable, and people who think it can/should be avoided, that's all. When remembering people who died, I dont see anything offensive about trying to stop the cause of their deaths.