How to Join Member's Area Private Library Search Today's Topics p Login
Main Forums Discussion Tech Talk Mature Content Archives
   Nav Win
 Discussion
 The Alley
 The Cindy Sheehan Saga   [ Page: 1  2  ]
 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Follow us on Facebook

 Moderated by: Ron   (Admins )

 
User Options
Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Admin Print Send ECard
Passions in Poetry

The Cindy Sheehan Saga

 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
Mistletoe Angel
Deputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 5 Tours
Member Empyrean
since 12-17-2000
Posts 34089
City of Roses


0 posted 08-18-2005 02:06 PM       View Profile for Mistletoe Angel   Email Mistletoe Angel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Mistletoe Angel's Home Page   View IP for Mistletoe Angel

As the ongoing protest of military mother Cindy Sheehan, which began August 7th, reels on in Crawford, Texas, not far from Bush's ranch where he is currently vacationing until the end of the month, the debate of the war in Iraq appears to be shifting more toward the feeling of the war among the family more than simply among the minds of our politicians.

Meanwhile, Sheehan has also become a controversial face, as new accusations from right-wing sources, including questioning thoughts of previous positions in the past on the war, calling her actions "borderline treasonous" and that she is "exploiting her son's loss" have emerged, sparking a debate of the nature of her protest.

********************************

I have nothing but fond respect for what Sheehan is doing. She is merely a grieving mother who lost a child in this war, and surely it is never uncommon to question in the aftermath if it is worth what he or she was fighting for. Cindy Sheehan is a most patriotic mother, whose son gave this country everything, who she herself obviously wished nothing but the best for her son Casey.

The right-wing assault on this poor mother is shameful beyond comprehension. She's protesting in a peaceful manner, she isn't wishing no harm to anyone, yet while these numerous personalities could be standing with her and sympathizing with her loss and giving her the moment to talk and have questions answered, they rather decide to energize an atomic smear campaign against her and against all the conscious believers who share her grief:

***

1) http://www.theconservativevoice.com/articles/article.html?id=7549

The Conservative Voice accuses Cindy of exploiting her sons loss:

"The shameless opportunist exploiting Casey is his own mother, Cindy Sheehan."

2) Bill O'Reilly said this on the August 9 edition of "The O'Reilly Factor" that Cindy "has thrown in with the most radical elements in this country" and "other American families who have lost sons and daughters in Iraq ... feel that this kind of behavior borders on treasonous."

3) http://www.moveamericaforward.org/

Move America Forward has begun the "You Don't Speak For Me, Cindy! Tour"

4) Waco residents are making an effort to assemble a petition to force "Camp Sheehan" to be moved seven miles from the ranch, against the wishes of their Constitutional rights of Assembly and Petitionm for Redress of Grievances, as mentioned under the 1st and 14th Amendments.

*****
http://news.baou.com/main.php?action=recent&rid=20426

In another isolated incident, a vandal, Larry Nothern, was charged for driving his pickup truck over a wooden cross memorial at the Sheehan site.

*****


These, among other efforts, are just example to how far these sorts of personalities will go to stamp out righteous dissent in this nation, even if it means disgracing the family of one who served. I'm under the impression no matter who criticizes this senseless war, these personalities will never hesitate to use the same tactics.

I for one am most proud to honor Sheehan for her efforts (I attended several Sheehan vigils in Portland last night) and I hope the feelings of this war can increasingly come from the family rather than just the politicians themselves, who we've already known well their heels are bolted to the ground on this issue.

Sincerely,
Noah Eaton


"If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other"

Mother Teresa


[This message has been edited by Mistletoe Angel (08-18-2005 02:46 PM).]

Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


1 posted 08-18-2005 02:44 PM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi

I have a problem
with her assertion
that Bush is in the pocket
of Zionists and oil interests.

http://www.nationalreview.com/goldberg/goldberg_200508160828.asp

"If your son had been killed in Afghanistan, would you have a different feeling?" Sheehan answered, "I don't think so, Chris, because I believe that Afghanistan is almost the same thing."

"But Afghanistan was harboring the Taliban, was harboring al Qaeda, which is the group that attacked us on 9/11," Matthews said.

"Well, then we should have gone after al Qaeda and maybe not the country of Afghanistan," Sheehan said.’


http://www.nationalreview.com/york/york200508180920.asp


Alicat
Member Elite
since 05-23-99
Posts 4277
Coastal Texas


2 posted 08-18-2005 03:03 PM       View Profile for Alicat   Email Alicat   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Alicat

She was a grieving mother who met with the President last year and gave high marks to President Bush.  A year later, and she reversed her position a full 180 degrees.  Then she allies herself with MoveOn.org and Michael Moore, who are managing her protest, providing food, shelter, clothing, facilities, providing PR people, and providing managers and other representatives.  Though her grief be valid, she has forsaken her husband, her son, her two daughters and blames President Bush for not just killing her son but also for using her son's death as a soapbox, the very thing she herself is doing.  She has quite failed to mention that he volunteered.  He finished one deployment and volunteered again for a second.  He was killed trying to rescue other soldiers.  He is a hero to those people.  Instead of honoring that, his mother drags his record through the mud, and blames President Bush for his death instead of the insurgent who fired the killing round.  He was an adult and he made his choices and stood by them.

Though (soon to be) Ms. Sheenan originally was grieving, now that is no longer the case.  She is grandstanding, basking in her 15 minutes of fame, and is denigrating the service of tens of thousands of servicemen/women.  And if I met with someone, then a year later they completely reversed their story, then slandered me, I would have no compulsion at all to meet with that person again, especially if I knew everything I said would be torqued and posted on a blog belonging to an extremely disingenous political documentary [sic] maker.

All those Vietnam era protestors who called to 'bring our boys home' then spat on them when they came back will no doubt do the same here.  While the military defends and protects their Constitutional rights and priviledges, what are the protestors doing for the military servicemen/women to secure their rights and priviledges?
Mistletoe Angel
Deputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 5 Tours
Member Empyrean
since 12-17-2000
Posts 34089
City of Roses


3 posted 08-18-2005 03:04 PM       View Profile for Mistletoe Angel   Email Mistletoe Angel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Mistletoe Angel's Home Page   View IP for Mistletoe Angel

I'm assuming Goldberg is referring to her quote, "My Son Joined the Army to Protect America, Not Israel" when he even bothers mentioning Zionists and oil barons in the article (and where does she say zionists?)

Sheehan can say what she wants about Israel or what have you. I wouldn't agree with her there,  and would only agree with the latter part on oil barons, but her feelings on Israel are not the central issue here, and I just hope she believes both Israel and Palestine have the shared right to co-exist together.

I certainly don't believe Cindy Sheehan is above reproach. If the protests go out of hand and get violent or take on some uglier theme, I myself would begin to question the integrity of them and think more skeptically of Sheehan. I believe at this time her protest remains in excellent taste, and these personalities attack her anyway just for questioning the war. And I think they look weak in doing that.

Sincerely,
Noah Eaton

"If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other"

Mother Teresa

Mistletoe Angel
Deputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 5 Tours
Member Empyrean
since 12-17-2000
Posts 34089
City of Roses


4 posted 08-18-2005 03:30 PM       View Profile for Mistletoe Angel   Email Mistletoe Angel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Mistletoe Angel's Home Page   View IP for Mistletoe Angel

That claim she pulled a 180 turn within a year is nothing but a lie being perpetuated by the media (and thank you for reminding me).
http://www.drudgereportarchives.com/data/2005/08/08/20050808_141400_flash4.htm

Matt Drudge began this misinformation on August 8th, the day after Cindy began her protest, using quotes from this June 24, 2004 article of The Reporter, a newspaper from Cindy's hometown.

What Matt failed to do was also note, in that same article, the following:

The June 24, 2004, Reporter article also quoted Sheehan expressing her misgivings about Bush and the Iraq war:

"We haven't been happy with the way the war has been handled," Cindy said. "The president has changed his reasons for being over there every time a reason is proven false or an objective reached."

The 10 minutes of face time with the president could have given the family a chance to vent their frustrations or ask Bush some of the difficult questions they have been asking themselves, such as whether Casey's sacrifice would make the world a safer place.

But in the end, the family decided against such talk, deferring to how they believed Casey would have wanted them to act. In addition, Pat noted that Bush wasn't stumping for votes or trying to gain a political edge for the upcoming election."


*

Also, Sheehan was referring not to her meeting with Bush, but her trip to Seattle, where she spoke of "the gift the president gave us".

Cindy has been consistent on her skeptical stance toward the war. And even if she did change her feeling, many Americans have slowly begun to understand the truth of this senseless war, and so their feelings change as well obviously.

Sincerely,
Noah Eaton

"If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other"

Mother Teresa

Alicat
Member Elite
since 05-23-99
Posts 4277
Coastal Texas


5 posted 08-18-2005 03:40 PM       View Profile for Alicat   Email Alicat   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Alicat

http://www.thereporter.com/republished

Article from Vacaville, CA 'The Reporter', dated 6/24/04 0600

It would appear that the Sheehans gave their story to the newspaper there.  So who's engaging in misinformation?

Here's more stories if interested:
http://www.thereporter.com/sheehan
Mistletoe Angel
Deputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 5 Tours
Member Empyrean
since 12-17-2000
Posts 34089
City of Roses


6 posted 08-18-2005 05:23 PM       View Profile for Mistletoe Angel   Email Mistletoe Angel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Mistletoe Angel's Home Page   View IP for Mistletoe Angel

What's your point exactly?

If you're trying to show how she has impugned the honor of America and our troops, the article clearly shows how she has been a frequent visitor to soldier honorings nationwide and how much they enkoy the meetings.

If you're trying to show how she has made a 180 turn in terms of her stance on Bush and Iraq, this article also reveals that quotation I shared not being happy with the war, and as I hope anyone could do, try and find some good and solace in a meeting or situation, and I believe she made an effort to be respectful while holding her personal thoughts of Iraq then.

Beyond that, I don't see it as a big deal whatsoever that someone's thought on something like a struggling foreign operation would evolve or change over time anyway. If you're a politician and you're often flip-flopping to the point no one understands where you stand, that's one thing. But an everyday American family man or woman who had a child killed or injured in this tragic war; I believe they are justified to think less of the war and our leadership now than they did before if so it is.

Sincerely,
Noah Eaton

"If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other"

Mother Teresa

Alicat
Member Elite
since 05-23-99
Posts 4277
Coastal Texas


7 posted 08-18-2005 08:21 PM       View Profile for Alicat   Email Alicat   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Alicat

This is my point.  I understand how views can change with the passage of time.  But to say one thing, then later deny you said anything, then to lambast the very person to took time to see you, that speaks volumes to me about lack of character.  She even had pictures on her personal website of her and the President, before those mysteriously disappeared.  link  Grief is grief, and lies are lies.

Say what you will of President Bush, he takes it as a personal obligation to visit with families of fallen soldiers.  I wish he didn't have to see so many, but he does.  And so he does.  And so his advisors try to fit as many families in as possible.  And the media is never invited.  He took the time to privately speak with her, at her request.  Not everybody gets that opportunity.  She did.  She spoke warmly of the time, at first, then drastically changed her story.  I do have to wonder into the impetus of that shift.  Was it her own personal impulse, or was she promised something by certain 527s and documentary types?

She was a mother of 4 and is now a mother of 3.  What about those 3?  What about her husband of 20someodd years?  Yes, she lost her son.  Yes, I grieve for her loss.  Yes, I support the troops, something she does not.  If you think she does, reconcile her own statement of 'this country is not worth defending' when speaking of the USA link (warning: long).

What I attempted prior, which you conveniently ignored, was her hometown paper reporting her story, which you stated was a fabrication and smear campaign trumpteted by Matt Drudge and other conservatives.  Well, you didn't ignore it.  You took a look, saw my points, then said 'so what?' when I was only trying to show Drudge and others weren't engaged in misinformation and misconstrual of phraseology.  You'll believe what you believe, and I'll believe what I want to believe, and that's about that.

I do respect you, Noah.  You are anti-war, and that's fine.  What you aren't is anti-war when the cameras are rolling, or when it's convenient.  You're anti-war consistently, and I admire your tenacity and spirit.  You talk the talk, then walk the walk.  And that speaks volumes about character.
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


8 posted 08-19-2005 12:36 AM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

Had Casey Sheehan been killed in a drive-by shooting on the streets of America, I think it highly unlikely his mother would be selected for jury duty. For much the same reason, I feel her voice in forming national policies is, at best, of questionable value. Sadly, I think her threat to camp on the President's doorstep until he meets with her crosses the line and is little more than extortion.

On the other hand, all this talk of her changing positions or not taking care of her family is nothing but irrelevant misdirection. Who cares? Einstein probably changed one or two equations in his time, and the poor man wasn't very good at taking care of himself let alone anyone else, but none of that makes E=MC^2 any less true. Sheehan's points should stand or fall on their own merit, not on how good someone else is at character assassination.
Brad
Member Ascendant
since 08-20-99
Posts 5896
Jejudo, South Korea


9 posted 08-19-2005 08:30 AM       View Profile for Brad   Email Brad   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Brad

http://antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=6975

quote:
David Duke defends Cindy Sheehan. What more does anyone need to know? If Duke were to point out the rather bluish color of the sky, anyone who followed suit, in Hitchens' book, ought to be charged with a "hate crime." Yet, it is fair to ask, just who is flying to the defense of the war Hitchens tirelessly agitated for? None other than Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, and the millions of Bible-thumping, snake-handling, trailer-trash fundamentalists whom "The Hitch" purports to despise. Well, what of it? No doubt some prominent Satanists support the war – not that there's anything wrong with that – such as Peter H. Gilmore, high priest of the Church of Satan. Asked "which side is the Church [sic!] rooting for?", His Evilness answers:

"Most Church of Satan members would support victory for the United States, since its secular form of government, as well as its culture, promotes individualism and freedom. This secularism is seen as 'Satanic' by fanatical Muslims and rightly so – from their perspective. The architects of the U.S. Government were Freemasons and they held many Satanic values, so we feel that Americans should embrace the role they give to us as 'The Great Satan.'"


This quote probably won't make much sense until you check out this:
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=19186

quote:
Why have the Nazis adored and adopted Cindy Sheehan? Ultimately, Cindy Sheehan reminds on, appropriately enough, of a character from "The Twilight Zone." In the memorable episode "He's Alive," Dennis Hopper portrays a young neo-Nazi leader who gets deadly advice from an ominous adviser. When it becomes clear the shadowy figure who has been guiding and supporting his work is the ghost of Adolf Hitler, Hopper asks, "Why me?" Hitler responds that it was Hopper who had chosen him, repeating his rhetoric and slogans. Today, it is Cindy Sheehan and the whole of the Left repeating the Nazis’ conspiratorial ravings, as the Democratic Party draws her person and her poisonous rhetoric into an ever-closer embrace.


Does anybody else hear Screwtape in that last line?

And if anybody is willing to read this far, let's add one more:
http://www.thenation.com/blogs/thebeat?pid=13737

quote:
Horowitz, the former left-wing zealot who is now a right-wing zealot, described the woman who has camped out near Bush's Crawford, Texas, ranch as "hateful," accused her of dishonoring the memory of her son and promised that if Sheehan and other anti-war activists succeed in bringing an end to the occupation of Iraq then "rivers of blood" will flow in the streets of America. It was a remarkable performance, so much so that even Horowitz admitted that he was "emotional" about the subject.


So, why is the Raging Right going nuts over this person? Why the need to discredit her? She isn't saying something that hasn't been said before. I think the answer is simple. It's because she is not Moveon.org, not Michael Moore, not the editor of "The Nation", not some fool living on a small island far, far away.

She's not a member of the perceived elite; the Right knows how to handle these types, knows how to discredit, to ignore, to mock, and enflame others against these types. No, the difference is simple enough:

She's a mother who lost a child. She is on record as showing respect for the president, she's supposed to be one of those who the Right enflames, never one who flames them.

Perhaps, because she has no real claim to authority or expertise, she should be listened to.

Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


10 posted 08-19-2005 08:53 AM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

quote:
Perhaps, because she has no real claim to authority or expertise, she should be listened to.

What happened to listening to someone because they made sense? Or refusing to listen to them because they don't? Neither authority nor expertise can make someone right or wrong.

Again, the arguments must stand or fall on their own merit. Everything else is just meaningless rhetoric?
Brad
Member Ascendant
since 08-20-99
Posts 5896
Jejudo, South Korea


11 posted 08-19-2005 09:53 AM       View Profile for Brad   Email Brad   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Brad

It's a great idea.

Show me if you can find any substance below:

quote:
LIMBAUGH: These are basically a bunch of miserable, angry people exploiting death. But that's actually a good analogy out there, [caller]. It is. This sort of has the same tone to it and the same hysteria that accompanied the Wellstone memorial -- which, of course, as we know, was not a memorial to Paul Wellstone. It was a campaign event, and it was "win one for Wellstone" and so forth. It was appalling. It was clearly appalling, and it was a factor in the Democrats' stunning defeats in the 2002 midterm elections.

From Coulter's August 17 syndicated column, titled "Cindy Sheehan: Commander in Grief":

To expiate the pain of losing her firstborn son in the Iraq war, Cindy Sheehan decided to cheer herself up by engaging in Stalinist agitprop outside President Bush's Crawford ranch. It's the strangest method of grieving I've seen since Paul Wellstone's funeral. Someone needs to teach these liberals how to mourn.

Liddy called Sheehan "anti-Semitic"; claimed that when Sheehan says "neocons" she means "the Jews in the Pentagon"

Radio host and former Nixon administration official G. Gordon Liddy called Sheehan "anti-Semitic," claiming that Sheehan's use of the term "neocons" is a code word for "the Jews in the Pentagon."

From the August 17 edition of Fox News' Hannity & Colmes:

LIDDY: Well, I think that it's true that there are Americans who feel the way Cindy Sheehan does. Unfortunately, they are Americans who are very anti-Israel and, in some ways, anti-Semitic. She uses the term how the "neocons" are doing this thing -- that's code word for "the Jews in the Pentagon." She has made statements such as --

ALAN COLMES (co-host): Are you calling her anti-Semitic?

LIDDY: Yes. If she gets Israel out of Palestine, then we can get out of Iraq. I mean, check out her statements, she's way out there.

COLMES: Cindy Sheehan's anti-Semitic?

LIDDY: Yes.

COLMES: That's outrageous.

SEAN HANNITY (co-host): It's outrageous what has been said.

ELEANOR CLIFT (Newsweek contributing editor): That is almost not worth responding to.

LIDDY: Look at her statements. Look at her statements and judge for yourself.

CLIFT: Look at your statements.

Liddy also took a swipe at syndicated columnist Arianna Huffington's Greek background on the August 16 edition of CNN's Paula Zahn Now:

HUFFINGTON: But you know, there are many, many different opinions in this country. And one of the things that's troubling me is the way the president is talking about what he's doing. It sounds as though he has so much time on his hands. He's watching [motivational speaker] Tony Robbins and [TV host] Dr. Phil too much, because he's talking about "my being needs [sic] to be outside exercising" or "it's very important for me to get on with my life." That's so very flippant and very petulant at a time of war, and huge sacrifice by many Americans.

ZAHN: Gordon, you get the last word tonight.

LIDDY: It may sound flippant and patronizing in Greece, but not here in the United States.

HUFFINGTON: Oh, wow, now we're doing ethnic varieties [sic]. Well, it's not just the Greek-Americans who are complaining; it's millions of Americans. And that's why the president's approval ratings are down at 42 percent.

LIDDY: That's a gratuitous assertion, and any gratuitous assertion may be equally gratuitously denied.

Hitchens accused Sheehan of saying "her son was killed in a war run by a secret Jewish cabal," referred to "Camp Casey" as "Camp Fruitbat and Nutbag"

Vanity Fair columnist Christopher Hitchens also implied that Sheehan is anti-Semitic, accusing her of repeatedly making a statement "to the effect that her son was killed in a war run by a secret Jewish cabal within the administration." Hitchens then asserted that Sheehan was being manipulated by "hysterical paranoid ideologist[s]" who have turned the "Camp Casey" protest into "Camp Fruitbat and Nutbag."

From the August 17 edition of MSNBC's Hardball with Chris Matthews:

NORAH O'DONNELL (guest host): Christopher, do you think that this represents -- or she represents some sort of tipping point in public opinion in America?

HITCHENS: Certainly not. She has, just today, lied about a statement that she made several times before to the effect that her son was killed in a war run by a secret Jewish cabal within the administration. She now says she didn't make that statement. She did make that statement. So as well as being an hysterical paranoid ideologist, or at least being manipulated by people who are, who turned this into Camp Fruitbat and Nutbag, she has decided not to have the courage or maybe the cowardice of her conviction. She now says she didn't make a statement that she definitely did.

Barone claimed that the media is covering Sheehan protest because they "do not want us to win this war"

U.S. News & World Report senior writer Michael Barone claimed that the media is currently devoting substantial coverage to Sheehan because "many in the press ... do not want us to win this war and think that we don't deserve to win this war." Barone further argued that the press corps during World War II would have seen her as "a person who was the victim of a personal tragedy and who had gone over the bend as a result of it" and would have "mercifully given her no publicity."

From the August 17 edition of Fox News' Special Report with Brit Hume:

BARONE: So, yeah, I think there's some risk that Bush is getting behind there. And I think part of this is the question of the press corps. I mean, I asked the question, if a World War II-era Cindy Sheehan had gone to Hyde Park and Warm Springs and camped out, demanded a meeting with President Roosevelt, would she have received coverage from the press in the World War II era?

And I've studied this era. And I think the answer is clearly no. She would have just been thought to have been a person who was the victim of a personal tragedy and who had gone over the bend as a result of it. And they would have mercifully given her no publicity.

We've got a different kind of press. Then, in World War II, the press almost unanimously wanted us to win the war. Today, we have many in the press -- not most, I think, but some at least -- who do not want us to win this war and think that we don't deserve to win this war. It's a more critical press.[/quote]
http://mediamatters.org/items/200508180005

I don't know about you, but the sense I get is that she shouldn't be listened to because -- she's an anti-semite, she's mentally unstable over grief, she's doesn't want us to win the war, or because she's being manipulated by others.

Take your pick. I'm sure there will be others over the next few days.

If you're going to talk substance, don't you first have to listen?
I just have to quote Liddy again:

quote:
If she gets Israel out of Palestine, then we can get out of Iraq. I mean, check out her statements, she's way out there.


How are we supposed to read that?


Mistletoe Angel
Deputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 5 Tours
Member Empyrean
since 12-17-2000
Posts 34089
City of Roses


12 posted 08-19-2005 12:34 PM       View Profile for Mistletoe Angel   Email Mistletoe Angel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Mistletoe Angel's Home Page   View IP for Mistletoe Angel

Alicat, I thank you very much for your personal compliments, despite our disagreements, but I also want to say I want to add this, which Cindy has said herself in a memo to Drudge; that it was never about her from the beginning, it's about the war.

I believe Drudge and others are trying to make this about her instead of Iraq, obviously, because it's getting worse in Iraq and these particular personalities from the right fear that reality. So they're engaging in efforts of character assassination not just to keep Iraq war dissent at bay, but to keep the issue of Iraq from coming from a personal standpoint, which I believe Sheehan has been hugely successful in bringing back the debate on Iraq to a family standpoint.

It wouldn't even matter if I was doing what Sheehan was doing, and obviously have been anti-war from the beginning. These personalities would still be running these same smear tactics no matter what, just because I don't believe in this foreign policy, where tens of thousands have been tragically killed. Can't you see that?

Cardboard cutouts aren't killed in war; people are killed in war. Cindy's coped with a loss of her own and she's been haunted with questions of what Casey was fighting for to begin with, and if it was worth fighting for. And she's doing what she's doing without any quick response team, without a multi-million dollar campaign, it's just her. She's controlling the protest in a peaceful manner.

There's a character itself in that.

People are complaining that she thought differently in the past. Hey, hasn't Bush too? In fact, I believe he said when Clinton invaded Bosnia during his presidency (which I'd also outspokenly oppose if I were politically active then), "Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is."

I can go on and on saying how that is one of the worst flip-flops ever and what not, but what I am most interested in is the consequences of this type of thinking, where more keep getting killed everyday needlessly and we have to find that light at the end of this long tunnel.

I believe Sheehan is also being most mindful of the consequences too under what this administration is doing in foreign policy.

Finally, my prayers go out to Sheehan's family as her mother rests in a Los Angeles hospital after her sudden stroke. Bless you all!

Sincerely,
Noah Eaton

"If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other"

Mother Teresa

Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


13 posted 08-19-2005 02:51 PM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi

“Every time Cindy Sheehan tries to adduce another writ against the current administration (a.k.a., "Bush crime family," "evil bastards in the administration," "(edit) hypocrites," "biggest terrorist in the world") — whether demanding a second private presidential meeting before so many other grieving families have had even one, or blaming Israel for the deaths of American soldiers — it has the opposite effect of what she intends. Under the sad logic of biteback, she reverses her own original position from the legitimate lament of a grieved mother trying to make sense out of the tragic loss of her brave son, to a deeply disturbed object of cynical partisan manipulation by the Michael Moore/Moveon.org Left.”

http://www.nationalreview.com/hanson/hanson200508190815.asp

[This message has been edited by Alicat (08-19-2005 03:37 PM).]

Brad
Member Ascendant
since 08-20-99
Posts 5896
Jejudo, South Korea


14 posted 08-19-2005 10:38 PM       View Profile for Brad   Email Brad   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Brad

Wow, Huan yi, thanks, I was going to go to the National Review today. You've saved me some time.

In Cindy's words:

quote:
Even after my repeated attempts to keep the focus of my protest on the war, the Drudge Report and others continue to try to make the issue about me. But I am not the issue. The issue is a disastrous war that's killing our sons and daughters and making our country less secure. They attack me because they can no longer defend this war.

I've come to Crawford to bring to the president's doorstep the harsh realities of a war he's been trying so hard to avoid. But no matter what they say or how many shotguns they fire or how many crosses they destroy, they're not going to stop me from speaking out about a war that needlessly killed my son.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/cindy-sheehan/memo-to-drudge-et-al-it_b_5868.html
Mistletoe Angel
Deputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 5 Tours
Member Empyrean
since 12-17-2000
Posts 34089
City of Roses


15 posted 08-20-2005 02:30 AM       View Profile for Mistletoe Angel   Email Mistletoe Angel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Mistletoe Angel's Home Page   View IP for Mistletoe Angel

These accusations of Sheehan being anti-Semitic, etc. are baseless and I believe these particular personalities are only embarrassing themselves in continuing to assassinate her character at this angle, from that and from the Wellstone comparisons, etc.

And if in fact her protest does take on some anti-Semitic theme or something, then yes, I will certainly think less of her as an anti-war heroine and more of a desperate radically-minded spirit. But the fact these accusations are being thrown out at this point in time, where I also doubt she is anti-Semitic, are just making these personalities look weak.

Going to the beginning of that article where he speaks of "schaudenfreude", that's precisely what these personalities want to do to any voice of dissent against this war, whether it may be a liberal politician, Chuck Hagel, a military mother, a high school student or Buster the Rabbit. They are employing these "schaudenfreude tactics" on those with questions, whether they feel strongly against innocent people being killed or merely want to generate deeper dialogue.

It has yet to be seen whether Sheehan will truly be the spiking horse of the kinetic anti-war movement, which is already very strong here, or if this particular incident will have its fifteen minutes of fame. I absolutely believe, being the optimistic spirit I am, that if Sheehan can keep disciplining this protest under the theme of Iraq and keep the issue from turning to herself, she will win the hearts of more and more and will find her place in history, and by the end of this season young people and families alike may finally break the silence and take to the streets in solidarity, calling for a withdrawal plan and end to the war.

Personally, I believe Sheehan may be making an accidental point out of this protest as well; the fact that Bush won't walk out off his front porch and talk with her for an hour or so shows how non-inclusive he is and how he only seems attached to his inner circles, how he seems to care more about this war than our troops and their families.

Sincerely,
Noah Eaton

"If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other"

Mother Teresa

Not A Poet
Member Elite
since 11-03-1999
Posts 4427
Oklahoma, USA


16 posted 08-20-2005 09:48 AM       View Profile for Not A Poet   Email Not A Poet   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Not A Poet's Home Page   View IP for Not A Poet

Well, I think I'd like to demand an hour of the President's time too. Then Maybe next year I'd like to demand another.
Brad
Member Ascendant
since 08-20-99
Posts 5896
Jejudo, South Korea


17 posted 08-20-2005 10:50 AM       View Profile for Brad   Email Brad   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Brad

And how many children would you be willing to lose for two hours with the president?

quote:
If Bush had the sense to meet with Gold Star Mother Cindy Sheehan outside his ranch before her protest metastasized into a media circus, he might have discovered that his secret plans are closer to her position than the views of his most fervent, alleged supporters.

Behind all the hype, the truth that remains is that the United States lacks the forces to ''win," but retains enough to avoid losing and thus prolong the madness indefinitely. If that reminds people of another war situation long ago in Southeast Asia, this is one point of comparison that is dead on.

Americans might still be willing to support a candid policy long enough to give Iraq a chance, but the true dilemma for an increasingly disbelieving public is posed by the fact that Bush has never been willing to give candor a chance. Without it, success is impossible.


http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2005/08/16/deceptive_talk_about_iraq/
Not A Poet
Member Elite
since 11-03-1999
Posts 4427
Oklahoma, USA


18 posted 08-20-2005 12:51 PM       View Profile for Not A Poet   Email Not A Poet   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Not A Poet's Home Page   View IP for Not A Poet

Brad, she has had here time with the President. There are many other grieving parents out there just as deserving as her and I suspect most of them have as much knowledge of foreign affairs and policy. There is absolutely no reason for him to see her again as he already knows everything she wants to say. Hell, we all do.

As for sacrificing children for the privilege, I doubt she had that reasoning. Anyway, I served my 3 years in the Army and my 2 sons each served 4 years in the Navy. I am happy that we all survived but we certainly were exposed to danger. That still does not give any of us the inherent right to demand a presidential audience. Extortion be damned, and that is exactly what she (or more properly moveon.org and michael moore) is trying to use. There are many more important item for the President to deal with. I deeply sympathize with her loss but have absolutely no sympathy or tolerance for her lunatic endeavor.
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


19 posted 08-20-2005 12:58 PM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

I'm sure no one wants to set a price on the life of a human being, Brad. Nor is that the point. Sheehan's demands are still demands and amount to extortion. I think the Administration is showing uncharacteristic restraint by not slapping her butt in jail. Her loss and grief have bought her that much consideration.

It doesn't matter whether Sheehan is right or wrong. It doesn't matter what she has lost or why she is motivated to step forward now. The lady has every right to state her opinions and tell her story, but she has absolutely NO right to force anyone, even an elected official, to listen.
Brad
Member Ascendant
since 08-20-99
Posts 5896
Jejudo, South Korea


20 posted 08-20-2005 01:47 PM       View Profile for Brad   Email Brad   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Brad

No, Pete, what is wrong with asking for clarification?

Ron, I simply have no idea what you mean. Do you care at all?

Mistletoe Angel
Deputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 5 Tours
Member Empyrean
since 12-17-2000
Posts 34089
City of Roses


21 posted 08-20-2005 02:34 PM       View Profile for Mistletoe Angel   Email Mistletoe Angel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Mistletoe Angel's Home Page   View IP for Mistletoe Angel

There's another point I'd like to make here, regarding the approach to this issue these personalities from the right are taking.

So they're all angry about this mother expressing her views and criticizing the war, yet they remain quiet about Larry Northern driving his pickup truck over the wooden cross memorial at Camp Casey and Larry Mattlage intimidating the protesters with shotgun fire and says he was preparing for "dove-hunting season".

These particular personalities are always burning in rage when they hear people opposed to an amendment to burn flags and of activists descecrating memorials and what not, yet they're acting here as though it's OK just as long as you're doing it to intimidate or disgrace anti-war protesters.

You can bet if it was known that a liberal activist had known what Larry Northern did, the media would be screaming their heads off. Assuming that these protests remain peaceful at Camp Casey, it's those two Larrys that have done the most vandalizing near Bush's ranch than any of Sheehan's fans at the site.

Sincerely,
Noah Eaton


"If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other"

Mother Teresa
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


22 posted 08-20-2005 02:59 PM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

No, Brad, there's nothing wrong with asking for clarification. There's a great deal wrong with resorting to threats if your request for clarification isn't met.

Noah, all you're doing is fighting irrelevancies with more irrelevancies. You want a point to be heard? Focus on that point to the exlusion of all else.
Mistletoe Angel
Deputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 5 Tours
Member Empyrean
since 12-17-2000
Posts 34089
City of Roses


23 posted 08-20-2005 06:56 PM       View Profile for Mistletoe Angel   Email Mistletoe Angel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Mistletoe Angel's Home Page   View IP for Mistletoe Angel

There is a relevancy in this, let me have the moment to explain it further.

I'm a very accepting liberal myself, as are many on both the left and the right of the aisle.

Please note that as I am referring to these "right personalities", which I sometimes like to call the "Angry Right", I am not using metonymy. There are many friends of mine whose politics lean to the right who I respect and openly embrace my differing views and dissent in a comely fashion, as there are Republicans like George Allen who have been understanding to Cindy and are respecting her space.

I'm referring to the personalities who claim to be representing the right, who I feel are hijacking it, as the "Angry Right". I'm referring to the Ann Coulter-Move America Forward right, the type of right whose mission seems to be to suppress voices of dissent, including smearing the purity of protests like Cindy Sheehan's.

There are many wonderful, admirable conservatives, both of old school conservative methodology and those who aren't "Bushbots", who aren't part of this "Angry Right".

Indeed there is an "Angry Left" as well. Often I hear voices of the right refer to the "MoveOn.org, Michael Moore left". I do agree with MoveOn and Michael Moore more often than I disagree with what they have to say, and I rather like to think of the "Angry Left" as communities like Indymedia, which is a disturbing bed of radical leftism. That Ward Churchill type of faction is the Angry Left to me.

The bad news is, many of the most prominent figures from the right (or claim to be of the right) across our media landscape are of this faction and what they are doing to Sheehan and other voices of dissent is beyond shameful.

The point in bringing up the Larrys earlier was that while on and on there's been so much outrage over those opposing the flag burning amendment and scream against all instances of troop and memorial smearing, in that particular instance of vandalism, these same personalities, rather than going after the usual suspects, instead shout at Sheehan and others in their pure protest, and that strikes my curiosity in an uneasy way.

Sincerely,
Noah Eaton

"If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other"

Mother Teresa

Local Rebel
Member Ascendant
since 12-21-1999
Posts 5742
Southern Abstentia


24 posted 08-20-2005 07:58 PM       View Profile for Local Rebel   Email Local Rebel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Local Rebel

quote:

No, Brad, there's nothing wrong with asking for clarification. There's a great deal wrong with resorting to threats if your request for clarification isn't met.



I don't think that threatening to protest amounts to extortion.  I call that freedom of expression. And negotiation.  As far as I know her demonstration is entirely within her Constitutional and Statutory rights.  I know of nothing that's been done that's been illegal. Even if so, it's no more than civil disobedience.  I haven't seen any suicide bombers eminating from the Sheehan camp.  While I'm inclined to disagree with Sheehan's conclusions her premise isn't exactly off the mark.  

I don't think that anyone in a position to make policy is in agreement with her conclusions either-- certainly not the administration, certainly not the Democrats, who, with the exception of maybe Ted Kennedy -- aren't advocating a cut and run philosophy.  From Dean to Biden to Clinton (Senator) the litany is the same -- we've made a mess in Iraq -- we have to stay until we can achieve some level of stability -- I'm not sure how that's supposed to happen though - and I don't know how you look into a parent's eyes and say your son, your daughter has to stick it out now and risk their life because we've made an utter mess of things.

The only way is to explain very simply -- that even though the premise we entered the war under was false -- it's very much true now that Iraq is a hotbed for terrorist training... 3000 trained Iraqi forces is a dismal showing... if Rumsfeld was the ceo of a corporation he'd be fired... it's that simple -- on the upside Iraq policy has been shifted out of his hands to Rice -- I don't know if that will work out better or not -- but it certainly would have worked better if Powell had been handling it -- let's just hope the auspices of the State Department are better suited for building a nation than the department that's designed to break nations.
 
 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
All times are ET (US) Top
  User Options
>> Discussion >> The Alley >> The Cindy Sheehan Saga   [ Page: 1  2  ] Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Print Send ECard

 

pipTalk Home Page | Main Poetry Forums

How to Join | Member's Area / Help | Private Library | Search | Contact Us | Today's Topics | Login
Discussion | Tech Talk | Archives | Sanctuary



© Passions in Poetry and netpoets.com 1998-2013
All Poetry and Prose is copyrighted by the individual authors