Michelle Malkin has written a blog tracing in detail a list of the more egregious assaults on Military Recruiters by the Anti War Left.  For those of us pissed off by the Berkeley Council's attempts to drive them out, this shows that to be a drop int eh bucket.  Here are a few excerpts:

Special report: Tracing the Left’s escalating war on military recruiters

Ideas have consequences. Inaction has consequences. For the past several years, I’ve chronicled the Left’s escalating war on military recruiters–and the apathetic, weak-kneed response to it. In Unhinged, I devoted a sub-section of my chapter “They Don’t Support Our Troops” to the organized campaign of harassment against recruitment offices on college campuses nationwide. The anti-recruiter thugs have thrived thanks to a combination of public indifference, law enforcement fecklessness, and left-wing ideological apologism. As you may recall, I have personal experience with the anti-recruiter propagandists, who lie through their teeth, exploit media sympathy, and harbor nothing but raw hatred for the men and women who protect and defend their rights to bitch and moan.

Many observers wanted to shut out any possibility that yesterday’s bombing at the Times Square recruitment center was ideologically motivated.

But will any on the left and in the Democrat Party raise their voices–loudly and clearly–to condemn the ongoing, militant anti-recruiter campaign?

Will they urge the Code Pinkos and their ilk to halt their intimidation and obstruction efforts?

Or will they continue to sit silently and attempt to downplay yesterday’s bombing as an isolated incident– instead of the all-too-predictable symptom of reckless tolerance for dangerous “peace”-peddlers skating on the edge of sedition?

Context matters. Drawing on my past reporting and blogging, here is a brief history of the anti-military recruitment movement’s mounting acts of vandalism and violence (which is by no means comprehensive and which I’ll continue to amend as commenters and readers remind me of other incidents). Let the apologists and pooh-poohers delude themselves into believing that the Times Square bombing was a “lone” act. The facts speak for themselves:

As the fight between Global Warming Realists and Alarmists continues, it is worth pointing out how easy it is to have bad or nonexistent science turn into a global call for action.  Once the gauntlet is thrown, it is difficult to reign it in with truth, and the longer the myths propagate the harder it becomes. 

A case in point would be the vendetta to ban plastic grocery bags.  It seems innocuous, right?  I mean everyone knows they kill millions of animals a year don't they?

In fact, they do not, and there has never been an actual study to show they have.  Despite that, do a Google search for 'ban plastic bags' and see what you get.

And then read this:

Series of blunders turned the plastic bag into global villain

Scientists and environmentalists have attacked a global campaign to ban plastic bags which they say is based on flawed science and exaggerated claims.

The widely stated accusation that the bags kill 100,000 animals and a million seabirds every year are false, experts have told The Times. They pose only a minimal threat to most marine species, including seals, whales, dolphins and seabirds.

Gordon Brown announced last month that he would force supermarkets to charge for the bags, saying that they were “one of the most visible symbols of environmental waste”. Retailers and some pressure groups, including the Campaign to Protect Rural England, threw their support behind him.

But scientists, politicians and marine experts attacked the Government for joining a “bandwagon” based on poor science.

Lord Taverne, the chairman of Sense about Science, said: “The Government is irresponsible to jump on a bandwagon that has no base in scientific evidence. This is one of many examples where you get bad science leading to bad decisions which are counter-productive. Attacking plastic bags makes people feel good but it doesn’t achieve anything.”

So, here is the false representation: