> Agence France Press estimates the crowd yesterday at 25,000, which
> backs
> up my estimate. ;-)
> Chuck
>
> --your initial 'estimate' was 10-15K...no?
It backs up my revised estimate.
> ---I don't disagree that Answer tends to overestimate their numbers.
> You, to score your political points against ANSWER, then seriously *
> under*estimate the #s...Then, from underestimates, you proceed to
> provide 'theories' about the reasons for ANSWERS' 'failures'...
> --------------------------------
Yes, I have political scores to settle with ANSWER, but I think that my estimates have been pretty much on the money based on first hand observations and other evidence. For example, ANSWER overinflated their January protest, which I witnessed firsthand. I suspect that that protest was bigger than yesterday's. Several of us compared notes later on, looked at the map, and used the NYC PD's formula for estimating crowds based on the number of people per block. We compared this to the size of the pre-march crowd on the rally and found that the numbers just didn't add up to support ANSWER's estimates.
> The area of the Mall where ANSWER held their rally yesterday holds
> about 30,000 to 40,000 people when packed full. The ANSWER rally didn't
> even fill a third of that space and the density of the rally was quite
> low.
>
> --Newsday reporters disagree with you. Maybe they're part of the Kim
> SungIl-Stalin-Hitler axis of evil conspiracy?
> ---------------------------
Last time I checked, Newsday is not a newspaper based in DC.
> Absolutely not. The cops later upped their estimate, which would make
> their estimate to be much higher than mine. I think the cops understand
> the politics of attendence figures and they understand that the powers
> that be desire that groups like ANSWER disempower the anti-war movement
> with their meaningless demos. I suspect that the cops are being overly
> generous with their estimate.
>
> --meaningless demo? so meaningless that liberal radio stations like NPR
> felt it necessary to go out of their way to smear them yet again...I
> think what you mean when you say meaningless is meaningless to YOU
> because you WISH something more effective could be done, though you
> have no idea how that could get accomplished. Or if you do have an idea
> how to do it better, you have kept it secret to date.
> Then again, I thought you were telling us a few weeks back that any
> protests against war are unnecessary now, no matter how big...
Looks like you are foaming at the mouth here. I don't see how this relates to NPR and I think everybody agrees that this protest will be forgotten within the week. I'm sure that the Bush administration didn't pay any attention to it.
Sure, I know what could be done to be more effective, but these Washington protests done ANSWER-style are just a waste of movement resources and time.
Compare the February 15th protests to yesterday's ANSWER fiasco. Figure it out yet?
<< Chuck0 >>
Homepage -> http://chuck.mahost.org/ Infoshop.org -> http://www.infoshop.org/ Monumental Mistake (blog)-> http://chuck.mahost.org/weblog/index.php Practical Anarchy Online -> http://www.practicalanarchy.org/ MutualAid ISP -> http://www.mutualaid.org/ Infoshop Portal -> http://portal.infoshop.org/ Infoshop Science -> http://science.infoshop.org/ AIM: AgentHelloKitty
"...ironically, perhaps, the best organised dissenters in the world today are anarchists, who are busily undermining capitalism while the rest of the left is still trying to form committees."
-- Jeremy Hardy, The Guardian (UK)