Aljazeera Disappointed by U.S. Protests

Aljazeera is displeased with America's anti-war protests. They were far too small.

From an article entitled, "Few join anti-war protests in US":

Few Americans have taken to the streets in anti-war protests marking the third against the US-led invasion of Iraq, despite rising public opposition to the war.

Demonstrations were held globally, but in the US, a country with a population of 298 million, the events drew only about 1000 people in major cities.

Yet anti-war sentiment in the US is at an all-time high and the popularity of George Bush, president, the architect of the war, has plummeted.

The low US turnout was mirrored in anti-war protests in most other countries.

Demonstrations in the US were organised in New York, Washington, Los Angeles, San Francisco and a number of smaller cities by several groups, including the ANSWER (Act Now to Stop War and End Racism) coalition.

At a rally of 1000 protesters near Times Square in New York, speaker after speaker denounced the Bush administration and the continuing US troop presence in Iraq.

...In Washington, about a thousand protesters gathered outside the residence of Dick Cheney, the vice-president. "This racist war has to go," they chanted, some carrying signs reading "Bush step down", "Impeachment now" and "Hands off Iran".

There is a lot of discrepancy in the numbers that participated in U.S. protests.

The Associated Press account of the D.C. gathering reports only 200 people took part, far less than a thousand.

In Washington, a protester wearing a Bush mask and bearing fake blood on his hands waved to passing automobiles outside Vice President Dick Cheney's residence, where about 200 people demonstrated against the war.

The AP report also gives much higher figures for the Chicago protest than Aljazeera was willing to cite.

Protesters in Chicago marched down Michigan Avenue to a Saturday night rally at downtown's Daley Plaza. Police estimated that more than 7,000 people took part, but said there were no arrests.

Maybe the 7,000 total will cheer Aljazeera, the network chosen as the favorite by 9 out of 10 terrorists, with the remainder preferring CNN, NBC, ABC, and CBS.

AP writes, "In Concord, N.H., nearly 300 peace activists marched about a mile from a National Guard armory to the Statehouse."

That's pretty sparse, but San Francisco makes up for New Hampshire's small protest by contributing a whopping 10,000 participants to the anti-war effort.

The San Francisco Chronicle reports, "More than 10,000 enthusiastic anti-war protesters filled the streets of San Francisco this afternoon as they trekked through the city to mark the third anniversary of the war in Iraq."

The New York Times puts the size of the SF crowd much, much lower.

One of the biggest protests in the United States was held in San Francisco, for decades a hub of antiwar sentiment. The police there estimated the crowd gathered outside City Hall at 6,000. Many chanted slogans opposing Mr. Bush, and most appeared to hail from a distinctly grayer demographic than that of other protest events.

However, the Times did offer an extra 100 protesters to the D.C. march.

Who knows what the actual numbers were? It doesn't really matter.

Aljazeera does make a good point though. "Demonstrations were held globally, but in the US, a country with a population of 298 million, the events drew only about 1000 people in major cities."

To get some perspective on the size of the crowds, consider this.

How many Americans spent the day watching the NCAA tournament?

I don't know exactly, but I'm sure it was a lot more than chose to take to the streets with "Bush is a terrorist" signs.