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
 American Legion: Declaring War On Dissen   [ 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

American Legion: Declaring War On Dissent?

 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 08-26-2005 01:34 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

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1001020671

The American Legion just wrapped up their 87th annual three-day conference in Hawaii this week, making headlines with the group's national commander, Thomas Cadmus, announcing they will "stand against anyone and any group that would demoralize our troops, or worse, endanger their lives by encouraging terrorists to continue their cowardly attacks against freedom-loving peoples,"

Thomas Cadmus also said that public protests during wartime "only provide aid and comfort to our enemies"

Also speaking, Vietnam veteran James Vialard said his toughest times serving during Vietnam were when actress Jane Fonda spoke her mind, or when anti-war protesters took to the streets., while Jim Hales, head of the Legion's Pennsylvania department, called anti-war activists "traitors".

In the end, the 4,000 American Legion delegates unanimously approved Resolution 3, pledging to unite in support of the war on terrorism and against anti-war activists, fearing that protests could motivate insurgents in their battle against U.S. soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan.

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

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

Some of my points here:

1) It's a shame that this long-living veterans organization, which has done many great things including veterans rights and community service, is taking a turn toward the minds of the Ann Coulter and Fox News extreme arm of the right who call on and on for the deportation of liberals/protesters and want to suppress dissent in this great nation, which the Constitution and the Bill of Rights guarantees to all Americans.

2) There are many great, mindful and flexible veterans in the American Legion who I'm certain their views do not agree with the minds of their delegates or commanders. Some have already publicly expressed their resignation from the Legion in editorials because of their outcry on dissent.

3) A vast, strong majority of Americans support dissent. A brand new AP/Ipsos poll released today reveals 7 in 8 Americans believe it OK for Americans to publicly express their dissent.
http://www.startribune.com/stories/587/5580679.html

4) Whether you agree or disagree with what anti-war protesters are saying, their right to protest, as well as those in support of the war to counter-protest, is guaranteed under the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the Constitution.

5) Dissent is a most patriotic gift that has long helped America mature and complete the very democracy it is today.

6) If Pat Robertson wanted to march in front of my house right now, I'd certainly let him, where he could stay as long as he didn't vandalize my property, for as extreme as his mind may be, he is granted his Constitutional right to express himself.

7) Again, shame on the American Legion for heading down this direction, for taking a stand against our Constitution, against our Bill of Rights, against the rights that our veterans have fought to preserve for over 225 yeas.

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

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

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


1 posted 08-26-2005 04:19 PM       View Profile for Alicat   Email Alicat   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Alicat

So those who dissent should be allowed their Rights, but people who dissent that dissent shouldn't have their's?
Brad
Member Ascendant
since 08-20-99
Posts 5896
Jejudo, South Korea


2 posted 08-26-2005 05:51 PM       View Profile for Brad   Email Brad   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Brad

And you can't dissent dissent dissent?

1)But what happens when you call someone a traitor? Doesn't that imply that you aren't just dissenting, you are telling them to shut up or face prosecution?

2)The protesting the protester line takes away from what they're protesting. Protest for the war, make a case for the war, disagree all you want, but what I see is simply avoiding the question of the protest itself.

Why are we at war?

3) Arguing that dissent or protest is 'bringing aid and comfort to the enemy' is a rather 'activist' interpretation of the constitution.

4)Historically, you can make a case for what you want (Shut up and support the war) if we were actually at war.  Lincoln, Wilson, and Roosevelt all did this.

But we aren't and we haven't been for the last fifty or so years.

Maybe instead of protesting the protesters, those who support this war should actually lobby Congress to declare war.

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


3 posted 08-26-2005 05:54 PM       View Profile for Alicat   Email Alicat   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Alicat

Some call protestors 'traitors'.  Some protestors call the CoC and supporters 'murderers'.  I'm just waiting for 'baby-killer'.

Of course, there's a large amount of interpretation.  Those who think the War on Terror is a police action won't support the 'war' moniker.  Those who think the War on Terror is a military action will support the 'war' moniker.
Brad
Member Ascendant
since 08-20-99
Posts 5896
Jejudo, South Korea


4 posted 08-26-2005 06:10 PM       View Profile for Brad   Email Brad   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Brad

I don't see what's controversial or interpretational about Congress's Right to declare war.

That's pretty specific.


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


5 posted 08-26-2005 06:22 PM       View Profile for Alicat   Email Alicat   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Alicat

Well, as far as I know, Congress authorized war.  So that's done.  The Taliban and Iraqi militaries were defeated and the governments removed, in rather short order.  All the rest since then has been rebuilding, or attempted rebuilding while complete morons keep blowing up water works, electrical grids, police stations, schools, hospitals, refineries, market places.  Morons wasn't chosen as a term of mental attribute; the one I really wanted to use would've been edited.

What Congress did not do was to limit the charge of war, as they did during the Gulf War.  The conditions of that declaration was the removal of Iraqi forces from Kuwait.  Period.  The aftermath allowed for forces to defend the Kurdish north of Iraq and Kuwait to the south from further attack by Saddam's military.
Brad
Member Ascendant
since 08-20-99
Posts 5896
Jejudo, South Korea


6 posted 08-26-2005 06:33 PM       View Profile for Brad   Email Brad   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Brad

Show me where they declare war.
Mistletoe Angel
Deputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 5 Tours
Member Empyrean
since 12-17-2000
Posts 34089
City of Roses


7 posted 08-26-2005 06:36 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

No, Alicat, dissent is appropriate in all forms. I have nothing against anyone in the American Legion who would disagree with what the protesters are doing and strongly question their credentials and intents.

What I'm speaking of here is something far more dangerous. They're calling for an effort to end or to prevent as many public protests and media events from happening as possible. Furthermore, the way they've chosen to respond to the growing anti-war movement which Sheehan has helped energize is by fueling McCarthyism into their convention; rather than saying they disagree with them or are understanding but believe what they're doing is the wrong approach, they instead choose to label them "traitors" and "terrorist sympathizers".

The more I go back and research what was going on during the protest of the Vietnam war, the more I find that many of these same complicit media tactics used today were at work back then, designed to attack activists. It may not be exactly appropriate for me to say it, but to America and many who lived through Vietnam, it indeed must be deja vu all over again.

These same intimidating scare tactics are being employed on these activists now out of desperation because they know things are looking real bad down there and they've already made an umpteen number of approaches in trying to defend the war.

The American Legion, Fox News, Ann Coulter and Move America Forward can say all they want about me being a sympathizer of the terrorists. I know better than that in that I'm not one.

What has come out of the annual American Legions conference this week strikes me as a huge endorsement to McCarthyism.

Sincerely,
Noah Eaton

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

Mother Teresa

Midnitesun
Deputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Empyrean
since 05-18-2001
Posts 29020
Gaia


8 posted 08-26-2005 06:46 PM       View Profile for Midnitesun   Email Midnitesun   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Midnitesun

To never dissent is to offer an implied consent. I certainly don't intend to stop dissenting until I'm vaporized.
Brad
Member Ascendant
since 08-20-99
Posts 5896
Jejudo, South Korea


9 posted 08-26-2005 07:02 PM       View Profile for Brad   Email Brad   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Brad

quote:
The Taliban and Iraqi militaries were defeated and the governments removed, in rather short order.  All the rest since then has been rebuilding, or attempted rebuilding while complete morons keep blowing up water works, electrical grids, police stations, schools, hospitals, refineries, market places.  Morons wasn't chosen as a term of mental attribute; the one I really wanted to use would've been edited.


You forgot that they also blow up people.

I don't have any problems euphemistically calling them morons:
http://www.macon.com/mld/macon/news/world/12476521.htm

quote:
Many Sunnis in Anbar say they'll vote against the constitution in October, as they've felt excluded from the process of drafting the document.

While fighting has badly damaged many towns and precluded widespread reconstruction efforts, Marines in Fallujah are working to make that city a centerpiece of rebuilding. Fallujah residences sustained some $225 million in damage last November during a U.S. assault aimed at clearing the city of insurgents, according to Marine Lt. Col. Jim Haldeman, who oversees the civil military operations center in Fallujah.

Homeowners have received 20 percent of that amount to rebuild homes, and will get the next 20 percent in the coming weeks, Haldeman said. Families are walking the streets once again and shops have reopened. The sound of hammers is constant, and men line the streets mixing concrete and laying bricks out to dry.

Even so, of the 250,000 population before the fighting, just 150,000 residents have returned. And the insurgency has come back to the area.

Iraqis are still a long way from being able to provide their own security in Anbar. As with much of the province, Fallujah has no functioning police force. Police in Ramadi are confined to two heavily fortified stations, after insurgents destroyed or seriously damaged eight others.

The Iraqi national guard, heralded last year as the answer to local security, was dissolved because of incompetence and insurgent infiltration, as was the guard's predecessor, the civil defense corps.

The new Iraqi army has participated in all the Marines' recent sweeps in Anbar, in a limited way. While the Iraqi soldiers haven't thrown down their weapons and run, as they have in the past, many of them are still unable to operate without close U.S. supervision.


Now, what troops have said:

quote:
"I don't think of this in terms of winning," said Col. Stephen Davis, who commands a task force of about 5,000 Marines in an area of some 24,000 square miles in the western portion of Anbar. Instead, he said, his Marines are fighting a war of attrition. "The frustrating part for the (American) audience, if you will, is they want finality. They want a fight for the town and in the end the guy with the white hat wins."

That's unlikely in Anbar, Davis said. He expects the insurgency to last for years, hitting American and Iraqi forces with quick ambushes, bombs and mines. Roadside bombs have hit vehicles Davis was riding in three times this year already.

"We understand counter-insurgency ... we paid for these lessons in blood in Vietnam," Davis said. "You'll get killed on a nice day when everything is quiet."

Most of Iraq is far quieter than Anbar. But Anbar is Iraq's largest province and home to the Arab Sunni minority, which dominated the government under Saddam Hussein's dictatorship. It's the strategic center of the country, and failure to secure it could thwart the Bush administration's hopes of helping to create a functioning Iraqi democracy.

Military officials now frequently compare the fight in Anbar to the Vietnam War, saying that guerrilla fighters, who blend back into the population, are trying to break the will of the American military - rather than defeat it outright - and to erode public support for the war back home.

"If it were just killing people that would win this, it'd be easy," said Marine Maj. Nicholas Visconti, 35, of Brookfield, Conn., who served in southern Iraq in 2003. "But look at Vietnam. We killed millions, and they kept coming. It's a war of attrition. They're not trying to win. It's just like in Vietnam. They won a long, protracted fight that the American public did not have the stomach for. ... Killing people is not the answer; rebuilding the cities is."


Do me a favor and just read the article. I've tried to make it flow a little better here, but didn't do such a great job.

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


10 posted 08-26-2005 07:04 PM       View Profile for Alicat   Email Alicat   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Alicat

For Brad.

I'll have to come back later to this.  Been fighting a head/chest cold since Saturday.
Mistletoe Angel
Deputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 5 Tours
Member Empyrean
since 12-17-2000
Posts 34089
City of Roses


11 posted 08-26-2005 07:09 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



Awwwwww, hope you feel better at least since last Saturday, Alicat!



I send chicken soup hugs your way, yay!

Love,
Noah Eaton

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

Mother Teresa

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


12 posted 08-26-2005 07:22 PM       View Profile for Brad   Email Brad   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Brad

That's not a declaration of War. Bush is complying with the War Powers act -- desigined to limit the powers of the Presidency when Congress does or has not yet declared war.

I have other 'talking points' but I'll hold off for now.

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


13 posted 08-26-2005 11:08 PM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi


I find interesting the evasion
of that Saddam Hussein was a monster
and his sons who were intended to succeed him
were at least as bad if not worst; that those called insurgents
can’t be conceived as intending anything better.  And yet
the essential response is we had no right to get involved,
much like Charles Lindbergh and the America Firsters.

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


14 posted 08-27-2005 12:20 AM       View Profile for Brad   Email Brad   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Brad

Evasion?

I don't see what SH and company have to do with constitutional checks and balances and or the power to declare war versus the right to address grievances to the government.

If you use the phrase 'provide aid and comfort to the enemy' as the AL does, shouldn't that be the question of this thread?

Are we going to take the constitution seriously or not?

Ringo
Deputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 02-20-2003
Posts 3696
Saluting with misty eyes


15 posted 08-27-2005 12:28 AM       View Profile for Ringo   Email Ringo   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Ringo

Noah...
Once again, I completely agree with the fact that you are allowed to have your opinions on any matter you choose, and that you hvea the absolute, militarily-given right to not have MY opinions on any particular subject... HOWEVER... I am going to invoke my right to respectfully tell you I feel you are not seeing things properly.

In the end, the 4,000 American Legion delegates unanimously approved Resolution 3, pledging to unite in support of the war on terrorism and against anti-war activists, fearing that protests could motivate insurgents in their battle against U.S. soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Please explain to me where this puts the Legion saying ANYTHING about deporting the deportation of liberals/protesters??? What it says is that they rose as one voice in support of the troops who are the ones putting themselves in harms way, and giving NO support to those who are not supporting the troops who are in harms way. The deligates of the American Legion (of which I happen to be a member) plainly stated that they feel public dissent hurts the troops effort to win the war, and that they choose to believe that anti-war protesting gives the enemy power (although only in their mind) over the troops and makes them fight against our troops a little more fiercely.
The American Legion is being maligned, my friend, for having an OPINION that doesn't match what the liberal.protesters feel everyone should have.
The Legion did not say it was illegal for the dissenters to have their view. The Legion did not vote to agree that those who oppose the war were to be denied their constitutional rights. The American Legion very simply voted to oppose those who dissent because many have felt (in their own minds and histories) the backlash from an enemy strengthened by said dissent.

There are many great, mindful and flexible veterans in the American Legion who I'm certain their views do not agree with the minds of their delegates or commanders

However the ones at the convention are NOT great, mindful, and flexible? Why would they not be great because they chose to have this opinion? Why would they not be mindful because they chose to have this opinion? I can almost guarantee that there were some who did not like the wording, however went with it because they felt very similar to what was actually voted on. Would that not make them flexible because they were willing to give a little on the wording when the sentiment was what they felt?

Some have already publicly expressed their resignation from the Legion in editorials because of their outcry on dissent.

I invite you to look up these veterans right now, and then again in a year... I will put my last ounce of breath on the fact that the majority of these same vets who "resigned" are STILL sitting at the bar of their post tonight drinking with their fellow vets. I also invite you to look them up one year from now, and I will bet you my last 50 cents that- with the VERY RARE exception- the ones that actually DID resign are there at the bar drinking with their vet friends. The majority of protesters yell their message, get their 15 seconds and then quietly go back to what they were doing.


A vast, strong majority of Americans support dissent. A brand new AP/Ipsos poll released today reveals 7 in 8 Americans believe it OK for Americans to publicly express their dissent.

Actually, THIS I agree with. I comletely support your right to PEACEFULLY and RESPECTFULLY protest the fuzz on a peach, if that is what gets you hot... right to the point where you stop supporting my right to PEACEFULLY and RESPECTFULLY call you an idiot for doing so. It is only when people decide that the ones that share those rights with you do not have the same rights for themselves.

...their right to protest, as well as those in support of the war to counter-protest, is guaranteed under the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the Constitution

I am going to guess that the portion of the 14th Amendment that you are quoting is: No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

WHO IN THE NAME OF THOR'S HOLY HAMMER IS DENYING THEM DUE-FRIGGIN'-PROCESS???? OR EQUAL PROTECTION??????  The US Government would quite simply prefer that the liberals and the protesters would keep their collective mouths shut, however have done nothing to deny them the right to spread their propoganda at the same rate (or faster) than the government is spreading theirs. ANd the Vets of the Legion have absolutely no power to deny anyone anything. Noah, you are simply to intelligent to actually believe this argument.

Again, shame on the American Legion for heading down this direction, for taking a stand against our Constitution, against our Bill of Rights, against the rights that our veterans have fought to preserve for over 225 years

So, in effect, you are saying, "thank you for defending our rights, yet shame on you for actually USING those rights?"

Again, Noah, the ONLY thing the American Legion delegates did was to tell the protesters that the legion did not support their cause and would they please shut their mouths for once.

Apparently, the staff of the Editor and Publisher are mind readers as well as protesters... Here is what was said according to the American Legion. You will notice that it is the exact same thing... minus the editorializing. In their version of the story, the E&P, in their wisdom, has chosen to use inflammatory rhetoric, and- in my viewpoint- chosen to inform the American poeple that they are so stupid that they cannot read the remarks as they were stated, and not make up their own minds as to what was meant.

A quote that the E&P staff apparently understood better than we could when they read the Legion's release was: "“No one respects the right to protest more than one who has fought for it, but we hope that Americans will present their views in correspondence to their elected officials rather than by public media events guaranteed to be picked up and used as tools of encouragement by our enemies,“
Apparently hoping you won't publicly protest means that you are against poeple's right to peaceful assembly and their right to free speech.

I also read the entire press release from the American Legion, and not once did I see where ANYONE used the word "traitor"
Other quotes that the E&P apparently missed:

“Warriors, above all other people, pray for peace, for they must suffer and bear the deepest wounds and scars of war,”


The measure recognizes that the global war on terrorism is as deadly as any war
in which the United States has been previously engaged and that the President and Congress did authorize military actions in both Afghanistan and Iraq.


There is one quote that the E&P used quite effectively... and quite wrongly (IMHO):

"The American Legion will stand against anyone and any group that would demoralize our troops, or worse, endanger their lives by encouraging terrorists to continue their cowardly attacks against freedom-loving peoples,"

Those of us who have been on the blue pages since the war started will remember one particular member who was banned because of the "facts" he presented about the US military, and the war, and about the "peace-loving Iraqi government". In, my opinion, Noah, THAT is what the American Legion was talking about. Cindy Sheehan is not the focus of their ire. YOU are not the focus of their ire. The two of you are using the first amendment properly (no matter how much I would prefer you didn't       ). It is the "banned members" who are acting like the other "famous protester" of days gone by, who was simply using her First Amendment rights that we are fighting against.

http://www.mysticwicks.com
  (try the after dark section)
Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


16 posted 08-27-2005 03:01 AM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi

Question, what country has formally declared war
on another since after August, 1945?
Brad
Member Ascendant
since 08-20-99
Posts 5896
Jejudo, South Korea


17 posted 08-27-2005 10:04 AM       View Profile for Brad   Email Brad   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Brad

Good question.

I don't know.

Does that mean the constitution is now irrelevant?
Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


18 posted 08-27-2005 11:37 AM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi


I think since August 1945, declaring war,
which meant all out war, took on an aspect
that made it and the part in the constitution
pertaining to it no longer applicable.
Mistletoe Angel
Deputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 5 Tours
Member Empyrean
since 12-17-2000
Posts 34089
City of Roses


19 posted 08-27-2005 04:32 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



Hi Bradley! I've missed you a lot here and am so glad you've added your voice to this discussion, yay!

Now let me respod to some of your comments.

******

"Please explain to me where this puts the Legion saying ANYTHING about deporting the deportation of liberals/protesters??? What it says is that they rose as one voice in support of the troops who are the ones putting themselves in harms way, and giving NO support to those who are not supporting the troops who are in harms way. The deligates of the American Legion (of which I happen to be a member) plainly stated that they feel public dissent hurts the troops effort to win the war, and that they choose to believe that anti-war protesting gives the enemy power (although only in their mind) over the troops and makes them fight against our troops a little more fiercely."

I never said they have advocated the deportation of protesters/liberals. I said that they are increasingly moving toward the minds of Fox News and Ann Coulter as an organization, which Fox News and Ann Coulter have often called for the kicking of liberals from the country, use the label "traitor" on them, etc. in agreeing to Resolution 3.
http://www.legion.org/?section=pub_relations&subsection=pr_listreleases&content=pr_press_release&id=303

Look at the press release on their official web-site. Even there it is admitted that Thomas P. Cadmus said that it was Jane Fonda and protesters that made all hell break loose during Vietnam, and that this must not ever happen again. He's referring to protesters in general that "demoralize our troops" and commit "cowardly attacks against freedom loving peoples".

I don't know to what extent they will go in seeing to it these protests don't happen again, but the language from the conference is most intimidating to me and very McCarthyesque.

*****

"However the ones at the convention are NOT great, mindful, and flexible? Why would they not be great because they chose to have this opinion? Why would they not be mindful because they chose to have this opinion? I can almost guarantee that there were some who did not like the wording, however went with it because they felt very similar to what was actually voted on. Would that not make them flexible because they were willing to give a little on the wording when the sentiment was what they felt?

I wouldn't know if all 4,000 delegates who've decided to back Bush and the war effort necessarily also agreed that anti-war activists are "traitors". I do believe the speakers I was referring to don't seem to be all that mindful to me, mindful tha these activists are not trying to impugn the honor of our young men and women in any way but rather believe our young men and wmen's mission is to defend THIS country and there are better, more sensible ways our elected leaders can do to offer freedom to the world rather than resort to war. To just dismiss them all in general as treasonous certainly isn't mindful to me. As far as being great and flexible, I suppose those are more rhetorical choice of words, yes.

*****

"Actually, THIS I agree with. I comletely support your right to PEACEFULLY and RESPECTFULLY protest the fuzz on a peach, if that is what gets you hot... right to the point where you stop supporting my right to PEACEFULLY and RESPECTFULLY call you an idiot for doing so. It is only when people decide that the ones that share those rights with you do not have the same rights for themselves."

And rest assured I would never even attempt to strip you of your right to call me an idiot for expressing my opinions.

*****

"WHO IN THE NAME OF THOR'S HOLY HAMMER IS DENYING THEM DUE-FRIGGIN'-PROCESS???? OR EQUAL PROTECTION??????  The US Government would quite simply prefer that the liberals and the protesters would keep their collective mouths shut, however have done nothing to deny them the right to spread their propoganda at the same rate (or faster) than the government is spreading theirs. ANd the Vets of the Legion have absolutely no power to deny anyone anything. Noah, you are simply to intelligent to actually believe this argument."

It's true they have no governing authority to change the ways of our country and such. I already understood that to begin with.

However, like I said, I've found their unanimous backing of Measure 3 to be a major endorsement of McCarthyism. Bush already said earlier in the week that while she respects Sheehan's right to protest, he added anti-war protesters like her and myself don't represent the views of most U.S military families and are advocating a cause that are making the U.S weaker.

The "Either you're with us or against us" vibe is evolving to me to the point where it is becoming "Either you're with Bush, making America stronger, or you're making America weaker." And with Bush saying the views of those like myself don't represent the interests of a vast majority of American military families, and with some featured speakers at the American Legion conference going further, noting they are the largest veterans organization, going even further to not only confirm its true but that the protestors are many things from "traitors" to those who provide warmth to the enemy, it's a huge mess.

*****

"I also read the entire press release from the American Legion, and not once did I see where ANYONE used the word 'traitor'"
http://www.thnt.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050824/NEWS/508240416

Jim Hales, commander of the organization's Pennsylvania department, got extensive applause for calling anti-war activists "traitors."

*****

"Those of us who have been on the blue pages since the war started will remember one particular member who was banned because of the "facts" he presented about the US military, and the war, and about the "peace-loving Iraqi government". In, my opinion, Noah, THAT is what the American Legion was talking about. Cindy Sheehan is not the focus of their ire. YOU are not the focus of their ire. The two of you are using the first amendment properly (no matter how much I would prefer you didn't         . It is the "banned members" who are acting like the other "famous protester" of days gone by, who was simply using her First Amendment rights that we are fighting against."

If that's true, I hope they can hurry and clarify immediately and prevent any needless further misinterpretation from occuring. Obviously, of course, their next few actions and responses to the Sheehan movement I believe will well indicate the intent of the Legion towards dissent in general. And I am willing to wait and see what comes next.

*****

Sincerely,
Noah Eaton


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

Mother Teresa
Midnitesun
Deputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Empyrean
since 05-18-2001
Posts 29020
Gaia


20 posted 08-27-2005 05:57 PM       View Profile for Midnitesun   Email Midnitesun   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Midnitesun

"Those of us who have been on the blue pages since the war started will remember one particular member who was banned because of the "facts" he presented about the US military, and the war, and about the "peace-loving Iraqi government". In, my opinion, Noah, THAT is what the American Legion was talking about. Cindy Sheehan is not the focus of their ire. YOU are not the focus of their ire. The two of you are using the first amendment properly (no matter how much I would prefer you didn't.  
It is the "banned members" who are acting like the other "famous protester" of days gone by, who was simply using her First Amendment rights that we are fighting against."

**************
? no doubt I must have been asleep somehwere along the line, as I don't even know who you are referring to though I joined Pips just prior to the infamous 9-11 events.

Why would you fight against someone else's rights to stand behind their interpretation of the Constitution? since when have our individual opinions been elevated to both judge and jury?
Ringo
Deputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 02-20-2003
Posts 3696
Saluting with misty eyes


21 posted 08-27-2005 09:15 PM       View Profile for Ringo   Email Ringo   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Ringo

I am not going to give the banned member anymore air time than I already have by naming him, however the other people I am refering to are the ones who have in this and wars past spread propoganda about how the other side of the fight were peace-loving and had no wish for war, and were telling everyone that would listen that American combat soldiers and Marines were completely wrong and that they were all devils and deserved to burn for forcing the enemy into a conflict they had no desire for... especially when the proof was there, and not being presented. Jane Fonda is the most famous and the most popular for my side of the issue to pick on, however she wasn't the only one. In THIS conflict, you would have to include Sean Penn, Tim Robbins, and Susan Sarandon, among others who spouted the same litany of garbage.
I applaud anyone who takes the time out of their lives to study the Constitution even a little, and try to interpret how it eaffects their lives and the lives of those around them. I also applaud anyone who has a belief strong enough theat they choose to defend it against certain criticism, such as Noah, and others like him... as long as they are being respectful about it, and as long as they are not using their First Amendment rights to blatantly cause harm to the gavernment, the country, or those who put their collective keasters on the line in her name.

Huan Yi- There have been several "declared" wars since the UN Charter, and the ending of WWII. America has never been in one, however several members of the UN have declared war on each other.
The Korean War is one example... Norht and South declared on each other... the UN never declared war, though.
The Middle East has had declared wars every other year between themselves. I might be wrong, however, I think that the Soviet Union actually declared war on Afghanistan. It happens, just not with the US.


http://www.mysticwicks.com
  (try the after dark section)
Brad
Member Ascendant
since 08-20-99
Posts 5896
Jejudo, South Korea


22 posted 08-28-2005 06:42 PM       View Profile for Brad   Email Brad   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Brad

quote:
I think since August 1945, declaring war,
which meant all out war, took on an aspect
that made it and the part in the constitution
pertaining to it no longer applicable.


Doesn't this bother anyone?

If it's no longer applicable then you change the constitution, you don't simply ignore it.

Am I missing something here?
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 08-28-2005 08:45 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

Hi Bradley! Again, thank you for the most important points you have brought to this discussion.

Although we may have our disagreements on this war and on foreign policy in general, I want you to know how we are in absolute agreement that there are those who abuse the rights the First Amendment entitle all Americans and usurp them wrongfully.

I agree with you about Jane Fonda. It's not WHY she protested that was wrong, it was HOW she chose to protest that I am most critical of. Although I do absolutely claim myself to be a "peacenik", I believe no reasonable person can deny there are those who live with hate in their hearts and use the hatred to abuse and afflict the innocent. I want you to know that I would NEVER resort to those sorts of tactics Jane Fonda did including hugging the enemy on landing strips.

I believe just as you do that the line must be drawn somewhere in how we publicly dissent. If protesters vandalize property in their demonstrations, the police should most certainly respond and charge the guilty consciences. If protesters would make death threats to an individual or their families, the person or family being targeted should call the police and have those people watched closely and take necessary action should matters get worse. General things like that must be considered.

It's true that there are those like Jane Fonda out there who indeed dangerously exploit these constitutional rights. Ward Churchill and the Indymedia left-wing nuts have done it on the left side of the aisle, while on the right the likes of Ann Coulter and Pat Robertson have done it.

What I'm concerned about here is how Cadmus and other speakers at the Legion coference put protesters alongside Jane Fonda in the same sentence to who he was targeting. Cadmus wasn't specific, he seemed to have referred to anti-war protesters in general. And when in fact Jim Hales referred to anti-war protesters as "traitors", I feel as though it wasn't a bad choice of words, but in fact he meant what he said; that he wrapped all protestors under the Jane Fonda metonymy.

As a liberal who is opposed to everything about this war, and an active voice of dissent to it, I want y'all to know that I love and have always loved America very much, from the bottom of my heart, and I wish nothing but the best for all guided by Lady Liberty. One promise I can certainly make to y'all is that as I continue to protest this senseless war, I won't resort to any sort of protest that casts that sort of propaganda that puts a halo effect on the terrorists and a horn effect on our young men and women, for I have nothing but respect and comfort to our young men and women who I believe they're not at any fault for this mess of a war we're in, and its the misguided politicians that are operating this war and sent them there to begin with who are at fault.

I want you to know I will discipline myself in each protest I make and will not associate myself with the likes of the usurpers. My message will continue to be simply that I believe there is terrorism in the world and efforts must be made to stop it, but we must stop it in a way that does not resort to war on wide cultures where a vast majority absolutely agree with us that terrorism is wrong and acts of terror cannot be justified, which also very much weaken and short-change our own forces in efforts to defend our great nation.

I hope the American Legion can see that most who dissent do so responsibly, I hope Cadmus and those 4,000 delegates can see though our message may be the same that we are all unique and many, most likely most, don't kowtow to the practices of Jane Fonda. The #1 reason I keep taking many hours protesting is because I love America very much, and I believe the way I have protested each time to this day has been moral.

Sincerely,
Noah Eaton

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

Mother Teresa

Ringo
Deputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 02-20-2003
Posts 3696
Saluting with misty eyes


24 posted 08-28-2005 09:39 PM       View Profile for Ringo   Email Ringo   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Ringo

Noah, my misguided friend,
While I might be seen by some as snapping at you, and "yelling" to get my point across to you, I can assure you- as has been discussed in numerous off-thread posts- that NO ONE on these pages feels that you are to be lumped into the same category as Jane Fonda, Sean Penn, Michael Moore, and others of that nature.
You are, in fact, one of the few liberal "peace-niks" that I am willing to give the time of day to, and- also as has been discussed in off-thread posts- (specifically to you, as a matter of fact) that you have my snicerest praise and support for being put in charge of the various protests that you have been charged to lead. I might not agree with them, and I certainly don't feel that they are going to do anything except show the troops that their cause is not being supported (again, MY thoughts), I know what a priveledge it is to be asked to lead a gathering of that size, with that potential, and I am sincerely proud of you for accomplishing it.

Now, if you would only use that power for good instead of evil...

 
 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 >> American Legion: Declaring War On Dissen   [ 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