Trouble in Crawford: "Why did my son die?" [Archive] - Page 2

View Full Version : Trouble in Crawford: "Why did my son die?"

Pages : 1 [2] 3

Nbadan

08-15-2005, 04:30 PM

NbaDan, you seriously believe the Serbs are now better off. Not to mention Milosevic went unpunished for war crimes. Kosovo was a disaster and it didnt achieve peace

Maybe not the Serbs, but the Croats and the Muslims are certainly better off. Milosevic sits in a prison at the Hague. I hardly consider that unpunished.

gtownspur

08-15-2005, 04:45 PM

Only problem is that Wesley's pussy tactics would of done jack shit to sadaam.

Nbadan

08-15-2005, 04:59 PM

Only problem is that Wesley's pussy tactics would of done jack shit to sadaam.

Why not? It obvious now that the sanctions and air embargo were working beyond belief, in fact, they were probably working too well. Saddam had not rebuilt any of his WMD programs and even his conventional Army was in shambles. Rumor is that by the end Saddam had become more of a figure-head in Iraq than anything else. This is why he had no idea that he didn't have any WMD's - his son-in-law had destroyed them all.

gtownspur

08-15-2005, 05:08 PM

Nbadan

08-15-2005, 05:18 PM

Iraq would still be able to shelter Al Queda with dumbass embargoes. And iraq had plenty of time to ship their weapons out of the country into syria before the invasion. Iraq would still be able to assist the palestinian terrorist fronts against israel. Plus, the embargoes were crap since iraq managed to cut around them through the Oil for FOod program.

Ummm, no. The only Al-Queda training camp in Iraq was in the Kurd controlled area of Iraq.

Syria had no need for Saddam's WMD since it has a hardy stockpile of its own, besides these weapons are dangerous and they have a relatively short shelf life. The 911 commission found no evidence that Iraq's WMD had been transferred anywhere.

Saddam paid palestinian bombers so that he could appease more radical elements within his country, but by no means did he supply arms or strategic aid to the Palestian bombers.

Nbadan

08-16-2005, 04:15 AM

Great (lengthy) summation on Sheehan vs W from Tom Engelhardt of AOline (http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/GH16Aa01.html)

Confusion in the ranks

Ellen Knickmeyer of the Washington Post reported last week that "a US general said ... the violence would likely escalate as the deadline approached for drafting a constitution for Iraq". For two years now, this has been a dime-a-dozen prediction from American officials trying to cover their future butts. For the phrase "drafting a constitution" in that general's quote, you need only substitute "after the killing of Saddam Hussein's sons" (July 2003), "for handing over sovereignty" (June 2004), "for voting for a new Iraqi government" (January 2005) - or, looking ahead, "for voting on the constitution" (October, 2005) and, yet again, "for voting for a new Iraqi government" (December 2005), just as you will be able to substitute as yet unknown similar "milestones" that won't turn out to be milestones as long as our president insists that we must "stay the course" in Iraq, as he did only recently as his Crawford vacation began.

After each spike of violence, at each tipping point, each time a corner is turned, Bush officials or top commanders predict that they have the insurgency under control, only to be ambushed by yet another spike in violence. In May, for example, more than three months after violence was supposed to have spiked and receded in the wake of the Iraqi election, chairman of the Joint Chiefs General Richard Myers offered a new explanation - the "recent spike in violence ... represents an attempt to discredit the new Iraqi government and cabinet". When brief lulls in insurgent attacks (which often represent changes in tactics) aren't being declared proof that the Iraqi insurgency is faltering/failing/coming under control, then the spikes are being claimed as "the last gasp" of the insurgency, proof of the impending success of Bush administration policies - those last throes that Vice President Dick Cheney so notoriously described to CNN's Wolf Blitzer as June ended.

Recently in a throw (not throe) up-your-hands mode, Army Brigadier General Karl Horst, deputy commander of the 3rd Infantry Division, which oversees Baghdad, offered the following, taking credit for having predicted the very throe his troops were then engulfed in: "If you look at the past few months, insurgents have not been able to sustain attacks, but they tend to surge every four weeks or so. We are right in the middle of one of those periods and predicted this would come ... If they are going to influence the constitution process, they have only a few days left to do it, and we fully expect the attacks to continue."

You would think that someone in an official capacity would conclude, sooner or later, that Iraq was a spike in violence.

It's an accepted truth of our times that the Bush administration has been the most secretive, disciplined, and on-message administration in our history. So what an out-of-control couple of weeks for the president and his pals. His polls were at, or near, historic lows; his Iraq war approval numbers headed for, or dipping below, 40% - and polls are, after all, the message boards for much of what's left of American democracy. As he was preparing for his record-setting presidential vacation in Crawford, Bush and his advisors couldn't even agree on whether we were in a "global struggle with violent extremism" or in a "global war on terror". (The president finally opted for war.) He was, of course, leaving behind in Washington a special counsel, called into being by his administration but now beyond its control, who held a sword of judicial Damocles over key presidential aides (and who can probably parse sinking presidential polls as well as anyone).

Iraq - you can't leave home without it - has, of course, been at the heart of everything Bushworld hasn't been able to shake off, at least since May 2, 2003. On that day (when, ominously enough, seven American soldiers were wounded by a grenade attack in Fallujah), our president co-piloted a jet onto the USS Abraham Lincoln, an aircraft carrier halted off the San Diego coast (lest it dock and he only be able to walk on board). All togged out in a military uniform, he declared "major combat operations" at an end, while standing under a White House-produced banner reading "mission accomplished". Ever since then, Bush has been on that mission (un)accomplished and Iraq has proved nothing if not a black hole, sucking in his administration and the American military along with neo-conservative dreams and plans of every ambitious sort.

The Iraqi insurgency that should never have happened, or should at least have died down after unknown thousands of its foot soldiers were killed or imprisoned by the American military, inconveniently managed to turn the early days of August into a killing zone for American soldiers. Sixteen Marine Reservists from a single unit in Ohio were killed in a couple of days; seven soldiers from the Pennsylvania National Guard were killed, again in a few days. Thirty-seven Americans were reported to have died in Iraq in the first 11 days of the presidential vacation, putting American casualties at the top of the TV news night after night. And yet the administration has seemed capable only of standing by helplessly, refusing to give an inch on the "compassion" president's decision - he and his advisors are still navigating by the anti-Vietnam playbook - not to visit grief-stricken communities in either Ohio or Pennsylvania, or ever to be caught attending the funeral of one of the boys or girls he sent abroad to die. He did manage, however, to fly to the Sandia National Laboratories in New Mexico to sign the energy bill and also left his ranch to hobnob with millionaire Republican donors.

In this same period, cracks in relations between an increasingly angry military command in Iraq and administration officials back in Washington began to appear for all to see. The issue, for desperate military officers, was – as for Cindy Sheehan - how in the world to get our troops out of Iraq before the all-volunteer military goes over an Iraqi cliff, wheels and all.

As July ended, our top general in Iraq, George W Casey, announced (with many conditional "ifs") that we should be able to start drawing-down American troops significantly by the following spring - that tens of thousands of them were likely to leave then and tens of thousands more by the end of 2006, and Rumsfeld initially backed him up somewhat edgily. Then, as Rumsfeld hedged, more military people jumped into the media fray with leaks and comments of all sorts about possible Iraqi drawdowns and there was a sudden squall of front-page articles on withdrawal strategies for a hard-pressed administration in an increasingly unpopular war. At the same time, confusingly, reports began to surface indicating that, because of another of those prospective spikes in violence, the administration would actually be increasing American troop strength in Iraq before the December elections by 10,000-20,000 soldiers.

Finally, after a war council of the Rumsfeld and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice (Pentagon and State Department) "teams" in Crawford last week, the president held a news conference (devoted in part to responding to Cindy Sheehan) and promptly launched a new, ad-style near-jingle to explain the withdrawal moment to the American people: "As Iraqis stand up," he intoned, "we will stand down."

But in a week in which the American general in command of transportation in Iraq announced that roadside bomb attacks against his convoys had doubled over the past year, such words sounded empty - especially as news flowed in suggesting that, while the insurgents continued to fight fiercely, the new Iraqi military seemed in no rush whatsoever to "stand up" and that our own commanders believed it might never do so in significant numbers. At his news conference, our never-never-land president nonetheless spoke several times of being pleased to announce "progress" in Iraq. ("And we're making progress training the Iraqis. Oh, I know it's hard for some Americans to see that progress, but we are making progress.")

He spoke as well of attempts to ease the burden on the no-longer-weekend warriors of the National Guard and the Reserves (who are taking unprecedented casualties in August). He said: "We've also taken steps to improve the call-up process for our Guard and for our Reserves. We've provided them with earlier notifications. We've given them greater certainty about the length of their tours. We minimized the number of extensions and repeat mobilizations." Unfortunately, at just this moment, Joint Chiefs head Myers was speaking of the possibility of calling soldiers back for their third tours of duty in Iraq: "There's the possibility of people going back for a third term, sure. That's always out there. We are at war."

"Pulling the troops out would send a terrible signal to the enemy," the president insisted as he turned to the matter of withdrawal in his news conference. He then dismissed drawdown maneuvers as "speculation and rumors"; and, on being confronted by a reporter with the statements of his own military men, added, "I suspect what you were hearing was speculation based upon progress that some are seeing in Iraq as to whether or not the Iraqis will be able to take the fight to the enemy."

While that may sound vague, it was, nonetheless, the sound of a president (who, along with his secretary of defense, has always promised to abide by whatever his generals in the field wanted) disputing those commanders in public. General Casey was also reportedly "rebuked" in private for his withdrawal comments. Our commanders in Iraq are, of course, the official realists in this war, having long ago given up on the idea that the insurgency could ever be defeated by force of US arms and worrying as they do about those "wheels coming off" the American military machine.

In fact, the Bush administration's occupation of Iraq - as Howard Zinn put the matter recently, "We liberated Iraq from Saddam Hussein, but not from us." - is threatening to prove one of the great asymmetric catastrophes in recent military history. A rag-tag bunch of insurgents, now estimated in the tens of thousands, using garage-door openers and cell phones to set off roadside bombs and egg-timers to fire mortars at US bases (lest they be around when the return fire comes in), have fought the US military to at least a draw. We're talking about a military that, not so long ago, was being touted as the most powerful force not just on this planet at this moment but on any planet in all of galactic history.

Previously, such rumors of withdrawal followed by a quiet hike in troop strength in Iraq might have been simply another clever administration attempt to manipulate the public and have it both ways. At the moment, however, they seem to be a sign not of manipulation but of confusion, discord and uncertainty about what to do next. If the public was left confused by such "conflicting signals" about an Iraqi withdrawal, wrote Peter Baker of the Washington Post, "it may be no more unsure than the administration itself, as some government officials involved in Iraq policy privately acknowledge." An unnamed "military officer in Washington" typically commented to Anne E Kornblut of the New York Times, "We need to stick to one message. This vacillation creates confusion for the American public."

Even administration officials are now evidently "significantly lowering expectations" and thinking about how exactly to jump off the sinking Iraqi ship. The president, beseeching "the public to stick with his strategy despite continuing mayhem on the ground", is, Baker commented, "trying to buy time". But buy time for what? This is the question that has essentially paralyzed Bush's top officials as they face a world suddenly not in their control.

Cindy and the media

And then, if matters weren't bad enough, there was Cindy Sheehan. She drove to Crawford with a few supporters in a caravan of perhaps a dozen vehicles and an old red, white and blue bus with the blunt phrase "Impeachment Tour" written on it. She carried with her a tent, a sleeping bag, some clothes and evidently not much else. She parked at the side of the road and camped out - and the next thing anyone knew, she had forced the president to send out not the Secret Service or some minor bureaucrat, but two of his top men, National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley and Deputy Chief of Staff Joe Hagin. For 45 minutes, they met and negotiated with her, the way you might with a recalcitrant foreign head of state. Rather than being flattered and giving ground, she just sent them back, insisting that she would wait where she was to get the president's explanation for her son's death. ("They said they'd pass on my concerns to George Bush. I said, 'Fine, but I'm not talking to anybody else but him'.")

So there she was, as people inspired by her began to gather - the hardy women of Code Pink; other parents whose children had died in Iraq; a former State Department official who had resigned her post to protest the onrushing Iraq war; "a political consultant and a team of public relations professionals"; antiwar protestors of all sorts; and, of course, the media. Quite capable of reading administration weakness in the polls, trapped in no-news Crawford with a president always determined to offer them less than nothing, hardened by an administration whose objective for any media not its own was only "rollback", and sympathetic to a grieving mother from Bush's war, reporters found themselves with an irresistible story at a moment when they could actually run with it.

Literally hundreds of news articles - almost every one a sympathetic profile of the distraught mother and her altar-boy, Eagle-Scout dead son - poured out; while Sheehan was suddenly on the morning TV shows and the nightly news, where a stop-off at "Camp Casey" or the "Crawford Peace House" was suddenly de rigeur. And the next thing you knew, there was the president at his news conference forced to flinch a second time and, though Sheehan was clobbering him, offer "sympathy" to a grieving mother at the side of the road five miles away whom he wasn't about to invite in, even for a simple meeting, but who just wouldn't leave. ("And so, you know, listen, I sympathize with Mrs Sheehan. She feels strongly about her - about her position. And I am - she has every right in the world to say what she believes. This is America. She has a right to her position ... ").

Talk about asymmetric warfare. One woman against the massed and proven might of the Bush political machine and its major media allies (plus assorted bloggers) and though some of them started whacking away immediately, Cindy Sheehan remained unfazed. After all, she had been toiling in the wilderness and this was her moment. Whatever the right-wing press did, she could take it - and, of course, the mainstream media had for the time being decided to fall in love with her. After all, she was perfect. American reporters love a one-on-one, "showdown" situation without much context, a face-to-face shoot-out at the OK Corral. (Remember those endless weeks on TV labeled "Showdown with Saddam"?) In addition, they were - let's be honest - undoubtedly angry after the five-year-long pacification campaign the administration had waged against them.

But they had their own ideas about who exactly Cindy Sheehan should be to win over America. They would paint a strikingly consistent, quite moving, but not completely accurate picture of her. They would attempt to tame her by shearing away her language, not just the profanity for which she was known, but the very fierceness of her words. She had no hesitation about calling the president "an evil maniac", "a lying bastard" or the administration "those lying bastards", "chickenhawks", "warmongers", "shameful cowards" and "war criminals". She called for the president's "impeachment", for the jailing of the whole top layer of the administration (no pardons). She called for American troops to be pulled out of Iraq now. And most of this largely disappeared from a much-softened media portrait of a grieving antiwar mother.

And yet Sheehan herself seems unfazed by the media circus and image-shaping going on around her. In a world where horrors are referred to euphemistically, or politely, or artfully ignored, she does something quite rare - she calls things by their names as she sees them. She is as blunt and impolite in her mission as the media is circumspect and polite in its job, as most of the opposition to Bush is in its "opposition". And it was her very bluntness, her ability to shock by calling things by their actual names, by acting as she saw fit, that let her break through, and that may help turn a set of unhappy public opinion polls into a full-scale antiwar movement.

What will happen next? Will the president actually attend a funeral? Will Cindy Sheehan force him from his Green-Zone world? Suddenly, almost anything seems possible.

However the media deals with her, she embodies every bind the administration is in. As with Iraq (as well as Iran), the administration can't either make its will felt or sweep her off the landscape. Bush and his officials blinked at a moment when they would certainly have liked to whack her, fearing the power of the mother of a dead son from their war. And then, completely uncharacteristically, they vacillated and flip-flopped. They ignored her, then negotiated. They sent out their attack dogs to flail at her, then expressed sympathy. Officials, who have always known what to do before, had no idea what to do with Cindy Sheehan. The most powerful people in the world, they surely feel trapped and helpless. Somehow, she's taken that magical presidential something out of Bush and cut him down to size. It's been a remarkable performance so far.

The tipping point?
Casey Sheehan died on April 4, 2004, soon after he arrived for his tour of duty in Iraq. His mother had never wanted him to go to a war that was "wrong", a place where he might have to "kill innocent people" and where he might die. ("I begged him not to go. I said, 'I'll take you to Canada' ... but he said, 'Mom, I have to go. It's my duty. My buddies are going'.") In her grief - always beyond imagining for those of us who have not lost a child - this woman found her calling, one that she would never have wanted and that no one would have ever wished on her.

For more than a year, having set up a small organization, Gold Star Families for Peace, she traveled the country insisting that the president explain, but in relative obscurity - except on the Internet, that place where so much gestates that later bursts into our mainstream world and where today, at Technorati.com, which monitors usage on blogs, her name is the most frequently searched for of all. As she has said, "If we didn't have the Internet, none of us would really know what was truly going on. This is something that can't be ignored."

In March, she appeared - thanks to prescient editors - on the cover of the Nation magazine for an article, The New Face of Protest?, on the developing military and military-family inspired, antiwar movement. She was giving a speech at the Veterans for Peace national convention in Dallas when she evidently decided that she had to head for Crawford, and the rest you know.

As our president likes to speak about "our mission" in Iraq and "our mission of defeating terrorists" in the world, so Cindy Sheehan has found herself on a mission. Our president speaks resolutely of "staying the course" in Iraq. That's exactly what Cindy Sheehan is planning to do in Crawford (and undoubtedly beyond). Bush prides himself on not flinching, giving ground, or ever saying he's sorry. But he also had remarkably good luck until he ran into Cindy. Whether in his presidential runs, in Congress, or elsewhere, he really hasn't come up against an opponent who was ready to dig in and duke it out blow for blow, an opponent ready never to flinch, never to apologize, never to mince words, never to take prisoners.

Now he's got one - and like so many personal demons, she's been called up from the Id of his own war: a mother of one of the dead who demands an explanation, an answer, when no answer he gives will ever conceivably do; a woman who, like his neo-con companions, has no hesitation about going for the jugular. And, amazingly, she's already made the man flinch twice.

No matter how the media surrounds her or tries to tame her, the fact is she's torn up the oppositional rule book. She's a woman made in the mold of Iraq war vet Paul Hackett, who ran in a hopelessly Republican congressional district recently. He didn't hesitate to call the president a "chicken hawk" or a "son of a bitch", and to the surprise of all won 48% of the vote doing so, leading Newt Gingrich to say that the race "should serve as a wake-up call to Republicans" for the 2006 elections.

There's a lesson in this. Americans are not, generally speaking, your basic turn-the-other-cheek sorts of folks. They like to know that the people they vote for or support will, at the very least, stand there and whack back, if whacked at. Whatever she may have been before, Cindy Sheehan was beaten into just that shape on the anvil of her son's death. ("I was stunned and dismayed when the United States invaded Iraq. I didn't agree with it. I didn't think it was right, but I never protested until after Casey was killed.") Some of her testimony at the Conyers hearings on the Downing Street Memo catches this spirit and it's well worth quoting:

There are a few people around the US and a couple of my fellow witnesses who were a little justifiably worried that in my anger and anguish over Casey's premeditated death, I would use some swear words, as I have been known to do on occasion when speaking about the subject. Mr Conyers, out of my deep respect for you, the other representatives here, my fellow witnesses, and viewers of these historic proceedings, I was able to make it through an entire testimony without using any profanity. However, if anyone deserves to be angry and use profanity, it is I. What happened to Casey and humanity because of the apparent dearth of honesty in our country's leadership is so profane that it defies even my vocabulary skills. We as Americans should be offended more by the profanity of the actions of this administration than by swear words. We have all heard the old adage that actions speak louder than words and for the sake of Casey and our other precious children, please hold someone accountable for their actions and their words of deception.

Last week, the Pentagon relieved a four-star general of his command allegedly because he had an affair, while separated from his wife, with a woman not in the military or the government; and yet not a single top official or high-ranking officer (except for scapegoat Brigadier Gen Janice Karpinski) has suffered for American acts at Abu Ghraib, or murder and torture throughout our imperium, or for torture and abuse at our prison in Guantanamo, or for any of the disasters of Iraq. In such a context, the words "please hold someone accountable" by the mother of a boy killed in Iraq, a woman on a mission who doesn't plan to back down or leave off any time soon - well, that truly constitutes going directly for the president's political throat. It's mano a mano time, and while I would never underestimate what this administration might do, I wouldn't underestimate the fierce power of an angry mother either. The Bush administration is in trouble in Iraq, in Washington, and in Crawford.

Nbadan

08-16-2005, 02:28 PM

Day 10: Camp Casey

Volunteers fix Arlington in the West Crosses after a bush supporter methodically ran over them with his truck. He was arrested by Crawford Police a short time later and made to repent.

http://us.news3.yimg.com/us.i2.yimg.com/p/afp/20050816/capt.sge.upc22.160805164641.photo00.photo.default-291x351.jpg

http://us.news3.yimg.com/us.i2.yimg.com/p/rids/20050816/i/r22103019.jpg

http://us.news3.yimg.com/us.i2.yimg.com/p/rids/20050816/i/r1412649330.jpg

http://us.news3.yimg.com/us.i2.yimg.com/p/rids/20050816/i/r4047942096.jpg

http://us.news3.yimg.com/us.i2.yimg.com/p/rids/20050816/i/r4047942096.jpg

Ginofan

08-16-2005, 02:45 PM

Day 10: Camp Casey

Volunteers fix Arlington in the West Crosses after a bush supporter methodically ran over them with his truck. He was arrested by Crawford Police a short time later and made to repent.

How do you know they were a Bush supporter? I've read several articles about the incident and nowhere have they stated the man was a Bush supporter. He obviousy didn't agree with what she was doing or maybe he didn't agree with how she was doing it, but that doesn't autmatically make his actions represent the other side of the spectrum.

Spurminator

08-16-2005, 02:48 PM

Maybe he was a Wiccan and the crosses offended him.

whottt

08-16-2005, 03:03 PM

http://us.news3.yimg.com/us.i2.yimg.com/p/rids/20050816/i/r22103019.jpg

Will this guy be sitting to the left or the right of Clinton at the next DNC?

Clandestino

08-16-2005, 03:09 PM

lol... fucking hippies....

mookie2001

08-16-2005, 03:11 PM

dam hippies with their crosses on Texas Presidential Corridors

whottt

08-16-2005, 03:14 PM

Damn hippies who spit on conscripted VietNam Veterans and called them baby killers and war criminals...

Damn hippies who ran to Canada.

Damn hippies who thought being a heroin addict was enlightenment...

Damn hippy who would never lift a finger in the aid of the defense of this country who is desecrating the graves of those who did...and using their dead bodies for his own political agenda.

Those soldiers would probably beat his ass if they could.

Trainwreck2100

08-16-2005, 03:15 PM

mookie2001

08-16-2005, 03:17 PM

yeah whottt
all these antiwar people in crawford we're the same people who spit on vietnam vets 35 years ago

whottt

08-16-2005, 03:26 PM

yeah whottt
all these antiwar people in crawford we're the same people who spit on vietnam vets 35 years ago

http://www.iconoclast-texas.com/Art/NewsArt/cindy/VietnamP1010100.jpg

http://spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=23541

Trainwreck2100

08-16-2005, 03:32 PM

http://www.iconoclast-texas.com/Art/NewsArt/cindy/VietnamP1010100.jpg

http://spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=23541

Old hippies are awesome

Nbadan

08-16-2005, 03:38 PM

How did he repent, 2 our fathers and a hail mary?

:lol

I was just pointing out the ridiculousness of someone running over a religious/spiritual symbol because he does no believe in the cause they represent.

Kinda like burning the American flag, no?

JohnnyMarzetti

08-16-2005, 03:46 PM

Dos

08-16-2005, 03:54 PM

[QUOTEI was just pointing out the ridiculousness of someone running over a religious/spiritual symbol because he does no believe in the cause they represent.

Kinda like burning the American flag, no?]

Why are they allowed to put religious symbols on public property, it is endorsing Christianity....

mookie2001

08-16-2005, 03:59 PM

"oh I'm religious
i belong to the master religion, even though its MY faith, i want to share it with you because I dont want you to burn in hell or teach my children your antifamily secular heresy
america was founded on christian values by christians"

by the way Im a christian i just like to imagine im a neocon RRWinger
but a persons religion is THEIR religion

Jelly

08-16-2005, 04:07 PM

I understand a lot of people in Crawford are just getting fed up with the intrusion of the media and the disruption that all these people are bringing to their town. For all you know, the guy who ran over crosses had no real political opinion, but had just lost his temper with these throngs of activists (lots of whom do look like total hippy freaks...not a style which will win you many friends in rural Texas.)

Vashner

08-16-2005, 04:34 PM

What I dont get is that a couple of vacations ago, Dumbya sped from Crawford, Texas, back to D.C., at 2 a.m. to sign a bill overturning 20 state and federal court rulings in the case of Terri Schiavo, a brain-dead woman.

Now he can't take five minutes out of his five-week vacation to meet Cindy Sheehan, a living, breathing woman who simply wants to know why her son died.

WTF is up with that?

Where is the "compassion" for this grieving mother? Huh? Humm?

He already met with her. and he didn't have to "rush back" to sign any bill. He can sign any bill or exe order from anywhere... there is no rule it has to be the White House. As far as his vacation.. he's still putting in a full days work it's the same shit everyday as far as briefings and meetings.. just you get to cut some wood and sleep in your own bed.

Ok so maybe he should of met with her earlier cause the way she's kinda whacky she probably would of flip flopped back to her original praise of Bush that she had after the first time they met.

Vashner

08-16-2005, 04:40 PM

What a bunch of hot air.. if you light his ass does fire come out? Cause that article is so full bull

SWC Bonfire

08-16-2005, 04:43 PM

I guarantee you it was just a guy pissed off at all the people clogging up his Farm to Market road.

Vashner

08-16-2005, 04:47 PM

Ok explain this to me.. because you know. I am a miltary brat and have 8 years of civilian work with the Air Force and Army here in San Antonio. ...

When you sign up you can only sign up for 4 years max.. So that means if he was in 10 years he probably re-enlisted what 3-4 times? .. Normal to sign up for 2 years each time. And he volunteered and resigned to go to Iraq for a 2nd tour in the combat zone..

Now call me crazy but do you think that is enough time to find out the "lies the recruiter told you"?

Jelly

08-16-2005, 05:08 PM

it seems that this woman is covering all the requisite Fahrenheit 911 bases. In addition to the suggestions about unscrupulous recruiters getting her son to sign up, the other day I heard her say (on Hardball I think) that she thinks the Army might be lying about how her son died ...it seems she now has reason to believe that he was killed by friendly fire and she has people investigating that. :rolleyes

Nbadan

08-16-2005, 05:13 PM

Woodstock 2005 in Crawford Texas anyone?

"According to Dianne Wilson, a local landowner has offered one acre on one side of the road and 180 acres on the other side of the road for use by Camp Casey. Although the exact location has yet to be announced, it is apparently closer to the Bush ranch than the current location of Camp Casey. It is being speculated that Camp Casey will be moved soon."

Link (http://198.65.14.85/News/2005/31-40/33news11.htm)

whottt

08-16-2005, 05:14 PM

What I dont get is that a couple of vacations ago, Dumbya sped from Crawford, Texas, back to D.C., at 2 a.m. to sign a bill overturning 20 state and federal court rulings in the case of Terri Schiavo, a brain-dead woman.

Now he can't take five minutes out of his five-week vacation to meet Cindy Sheehan, a living, breathing woman who simply wants to know why her son died.

WTF is up with that?

Where is the "compassion" for this grieving mother? Huh? Humm?

Maybe it's that ole...."You murdered my son, are a war criminal, and should be impeached" thing she's got going that gives W reason to think he probably isn't going to change her mind.... even if he meets her for a SECOND time.

But what do I know...I'm not an idiot.

Spurminator

08-16-2005, 05:24 PM

Woodstock 2005 in Crawford Texas anyone?

http://www.planearium2.de/bilder/news-902.jpg

Yeah. You know, I had a guy in Jackson county. He had a little drum circle in his backyard. It turned into a drum circle four miles in diameter. You get a few hippies playing drums and next thing you know, you got yourself a colony.

For the past several days I've been... noticing a steep rise in the number of hippies coming to town. At first I thought maybe it was just a coincidence. Then I saw this... Three new drum circles have sprouted up here, here, and here. They're all growing in diameter, at a rate of two hippies per hour. What this means... is that the hippies are conglomerating. They're thriving, if you will. I think that they're setting up for a... hippie music festival.

It's, it's simple science. Look: When hippies start to nest in a new area, it draws other hippies in. With the right weather conditions and topography, it can lead to a music festival. One that last for days, even weeks. Reggae on the River, Woodstock, Burning Man, they will all pale in comparison to what we're looking at now. In my professional opinion... I think we're looking at a full-blown hippie jam festival the size of which we've never seen.

whottt

08-16-2005, 05:26 PM

whottt

08-16-2005, 05:48 PM

If this woman really wanted to protest and make her son's death count for something....

She'd be pressuring the US government to put pressure on the Provisional Government of Iraq to gurantee women's rights in their new consitution...

Then, regardless of the legitimacy of our entry into Iraq, regardless of the motiviations of Bush to go in there...his death would unquestionably count for something noble....

Trainwreck2100

08-16-2005, 06:27 PM

One good thing....

A terrorist probably won't be nuking the biggest red state of em all while all of Usama's supporters are congregating on W's lawn....indeed...the weapon he's got now is better than a nuke.

Just because they are against the war doesn't mean they support blowing up of buildings on sovereign land.

JohnnyMarzetti

08-16-2005, 06:51 PM

Why the hate? This lady has Dubya in her.

From HuffingtonPost:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/theblog/archive/cindy-sheehan/day-9-at-camp-casey_5665.html

"if George or anybody else thinks I am leaving before my mission is "accomplished" they have another thing coming. I will stay the course. I will finish the mission. I will take no prisoners."

whottt

08-16-2005, 07:26 PM

Just because they are against the war doesn't mean they support blowing up of buildings on sovereign land.

The Iraqis who have risen up against the occupation are not “insurgents” or “terrorists” or “The Enemy.” They are the REVOLUTION, the Minutemen, and their numbers will grow—and they will win. -- Michael Moore(from his own website before he edited it).

Trainwreck2100

08-16-2005, 08:08 PM

-- Michael Moore(from his own website before he edited it).

Yes because all of these people follow Michael Moore with whatever he says. And just because they share the same belief about the war thay automatically believe that.

Dos

08-17-2005, 06:47 AM

eventually the media will get sick of this, oh yeah another thing, I am surprised none of the left leaning democrats are out there embracing her cause... I wonder what they might be fearing...... where's jesse jackson, al gore, john kerry, ted kennedy, al sharpton... oh the injustice of it all.... lol... (they probably know it's a volunteer army and won't touch this issue)

Trainwreck2100

08-17-2005, 12:12 PM

http://lang.dailybulletin.com/opinions/cartoon/archive/0805/16/gordon450.gif

That's not very nice.

whottt

08-17-2005, 01:05 PM

Yes because all of these people follow Michael Moore with whatever he says. And just because they share the same belief about the war thay automatically believe that.

Yes because you obviously haven't read her comments. She's got exactly his same beliefs.

Nbadan

08-17-2005, 02:24 PM

Rush is off his meds again and in full effect in the latest public information release from the Ministry of Truth...

"I mean, Cindy Sheehan is just Bill Burkett. Her story is nothing more than forged documents. There's nothing about it that's real, including the mainstream media's glomming onto it. It's not real. It's nothing more than an attempt. It's the latest effort made by the coordinated left."

Sounds like Whott, NO?

whottt

08-17-2005, 02:45 PM

Yeah? And you sound like Usama half the time...

Nbadan

08-17-2005, 03:54 PM

Cindy Sheehan's Tragic Critics
By John Nichols (http://www.thenation.com/blogs/thebeat?bid=1&pid=13737)

While debating conservative pundit David Horowitz on Ron Reagan's MSNBC show the other night, I was struck by the desperation with which supporters of the war have turned their fury on Cindy Sheehan, the mother of an American soldier killed in Iraq who has been trying to get an audience with President Bush.

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.

Of course, Horowitz is wrong, on every point. But it is difficult to get angry with him, or even to take his ranting seriously. When Reagan asked me if I wanted to "dignify" Horowitz's comments with a response, I declined, except to express a measure of sympathy for Horowitz and other true believers who have become so frenzied in their need to defend the Iraq imbroglio that they feel they must attack a grieving mother who wants to make sure that no more parents will have to bury their sons and daughters as a result of the Bush administration's arrogance.

The rapidly dwindling minority of Americans who continue to search for some rationale for keeping U.S. troops in Iraq has been driven to the brink of breakdown by the success of Sheehan's protest. Go to the website of William F. Buckley's National Review magazine and you will find Sheehan described in headlines as "nutty," dismissed by columnists as "the mouthpiece... of howling-at-the-moon, bile-spewing Bush haters" and accused of "sucking up intellectual air" that, presumably, would be better utilized by Condoleezza Rice explaining once more that it would be wrong to read too much into the August 6, 2001, briefing document that declared: "Bin Laden determined to attack inside the U.S." Human Events, the conservative weekly newspaper, dismisses Sheehan as a "professional griever" who "can claim to be in perpetual mourning for her fallen son" -- as if there is some time limit on maternal sorrow over the death of a child.

On the ensuing thread, it is very amusing to see how the right-wing posters help Mr. Nichols drive his point home.

whottt

08-17-2005, 04:00 PM

She is dishonoring the memory of her son...big time.

It's not my opinion...it's fact.

He didn't die for the cause she is now using his name to promote.

He didn't die for that reason....Regardless of what the Bush admin's motivations were to enter into the war...he was there for noble reasons...on a noble quest.

This man was Pro-American...not Pro-terrorist...and he was a smarter man than she was and a better American...

She's disgracing him and his memory worse than any terrorist ever could.

How dare she stick his name next to Michael Moore's....and claim she is acting on his behalf...how dare she.

Thems the facts. Deal with it.

Nbadan

08-17-2005, 04:04 PM

How do you know what he stood for Whott? Did you know him personally? Maybe the reason he did his job was because, well, it was his job.

Oh hell, the Nichol's article is too good, let's read the rest of it...

Fox News Channel spinner-in-chief Bill O'Reilly accuses Sheehan of being "in bed with the radical left," including -- horrors! -- "9-11 families" that are still seeking answers about whether, in the first months of 2001, the Bush administration was more focused on finding excuses to attack Iraq than on protecting Americans from terrorism. And Rush Limbaugh was on the radio the other day ranting about how, "(Sheehan's) story is nothing more than forged documents. There's nothing about it that's real..." (Just to clarify for Limbaugh listeners: Cindy Sheehan's 24-year-old son Casey really did die in Iraq, and his mother really would like to talk with President Bush about all those claims regarding WMDs and al-Qaida ties that the administration used to peddle the "case" for war.)

The pro-war pundits who continue to defend the occupation of Iraq are freaked out by the fact that a grieving mother is calling into question their claim that the only way to "support the troops" is by keeping them in the frontlines of George W. Bush's failed experiment. Bush backers are horrified that Sheehan's sincere and patriotic anti-war voice has captured the nation's attention.

What the pro-war crowd does not understand is that Cindy Sheehan is not inspiring opposition to the occupation. She is merely putting a face on the mainstream sentiments of a country that has stopped believing the president's promises with regard to Iraq. According to the latest Newsweek poll, 61 percent of Americans disapprove of Bush's handing of the war, while just 26 percent support the president's argument that large numbers of U.S. military personnel should remain in Iraq for as long as it takes to achieve the administration's goals there.

The supporters of this war have run out of convincing lies and effective emotional appeals. Now, they are reduced to attacking the grieving mothers of dead soldiers. Samuel Johnson suggested that patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel. But, with their attacks on Cindy Sheehan, the apologists for George Bush's infamy have found a new and darker refuge.

whottt

08-17-2005, 04:07 PM

How do you know what he stood for Whott? Did you know him personally? Maybe the reason he did his job was because, well, it was his job.

Because he re-enlisted in the US Military AFTER the Iraq war...

Because he was told it was not necessary for him to go on the mission that killed him...and he went anyway.

Her son was as far away from the Michael Moore's of this world as you can get...and he'd be ashamed to have his name being used to promote something Michael Moore stands for....

This woman is in deep grief and has lost her way...I don't blame her for being angry....

But one day she is going to be ashamed of what she did here in her sons name....and she will apologize for it...wait and see.

SWC Bonfire

08-17-2005, 04:09 PM

http://www.planearium2.de/bilder/news-902.jpg

Yeah. You know, I had a guy in Jackson county. He had a little drum circle in his backyard. It turned into a drum circle four miles in diameter. You get a few hippies playing drums and next thing you know, you got yourself a colony.

For the past several days I've been... noticing a steep rise in the number of hippies coming to town. At first I thought maybe it was just a coincidence. Then I saw this... Three new drum circles have sprouted up here, here, and here. They're all growing in diameter, at a rate of two hippies per hour. What this means... is that the hippies are conglomerating. They're thriving, if you will. I think that they're setting up for a... hippie music festival.

It's, it's simple science. Look: When hippies start to nest in a new area, it draws other hippies in. With the right weather conditions and topography, it can lead to a music festival. One that last for days, even weeks. Reggae on the River, Woodstock, Burning Man, they will all pale in comparison to what we're looking at now. In my professional opinion... I think we're looking at a full-blown hippie jam festival the size of which we've never seen.

That became my favorite episode of all time the very instant it aired. :tu

...then you get the worst hippies of them all. The college know-it-all hippies.

whottt

08-17-2005, 04:11 PM

I'd really like to hear what the father has to say about this....to make sure Casey isn't being taken advantage of in death by his mother and a decietful group of leftwingers(she's being taken advantage of too)......who don't care how much they piss on the legacy a dead man wanted to leave, the only thing he has to leave. The message he was trying to send.

I read that part of the reason the father is divorcing her is because of her extremist political views...I am certain looking at Casey's actions that his stance is completely different from that of his mother.

When he speaks...I expect a full apology from you, move on, Michael Moore, and everyone involved for misrepresnting what this kid stood for and using it for your own fucking seflish reasons. You offend me greatly.

I sympathize with the son...not the mother...because the son is the one that no longer has his voice to speak with...and in my gut I know that his mother is not saying the things he would want her to say.

whottt

08-17-2005, 04:22 PM

I can just picture this kid going around calling Bush a murderer and a war criminal...as he re-enlists after the Iraq war...

Who the fuck do you people think you are kidding?

Nbadan

08-17-2005, 04:31 PM

Because he re-enlisted in the US Military AFTER the Iraq war...

Because he was told it was not necessary for him to go on the mission that killed him...and he went anyway.

That's what troops do, Whott. Maybe at one time he did support the war, hell, at one time 70% of the American public supported the war, but those numbers have dwindled down to 26% today. Also, when he reuped, you didn't know what kind of pressure he was under at the time, maybe he was inticed by a $50,000 or more signing bonus, or maybe he just felt bad leaving his buddies in Iraq short-handed because all these young, conservative, chicken-hawks who support W's war have better things to do, just like their leader did in Nam.

whottt

08-17-2005, 04:41 PM

That's what troops do, Whott.

Paul Hackett?

Maybe at one time he did support the war, hell, at one time 70% of the American public supported the war, but those numbers have dwindled down to 26% today.

How do you know? Do you have the demographic breakdown on those polls?

Also, when he reuped, you didn't know what kind of pressure he was under at the time, maybe he was inticed by a $50,000 or more signing bonus,

Are you saying this man was not in control of his own decisions?

Are you saying he is a flake?

Au contraire...his mother is the flake.

or maybe he just felt bad leaving his buddies in Iraq short-handed

I imagine that was a big part of it...

because all these young, conservative, chicken-hawks who support W's war have better things to do, just like their leader did in Nam.

W was in the military in Vietnam...he was in the reserves...just like Kerry...his reserve troup never got called into serve...and Daddy Bush did serve.

Michael Moore was never in favor of this war at anytime...he is an anti-American..he does not feel this country is worth fighting and dying for, he sympathizes with opressive causes and is a racist......this kid is not like that.

Stop using him.

Jelly

08-17-2005, 06:47 PM

All this time, Cindy Sheehan has been insisting that all she just wants to do is ask Bush why her son died and has led us to believe that even though she met him once, she didn't get a chance to question him. But according to the an interview she gave in the San Francisco Chronicle earlier this year, she did, in fact, get to ask this question and Bush gave her an answer.

"She met Bush once, during his visit to Fort Lewis, Wash. She says she tried to show the president photos of Casey, but he wouldn't look at them. She says she asked him, "Mr. President, what did my son die for?" and he said, "I believe every person deserves to be free."

Jelly

08-17-2005, 06:52 PM

[QUOTE=whottt]

W was in the military in Vietnam...he was in the reserves...just like Kerry...his reserve troup never got called into serve...and Daddy Bush did serve.

QUOTE]

Daddy Bush didn't just serve, he has an impressive war record..

"On his 18th birthday he enlisted in the armed forces. The youngest pilot in the Navy when he received his wings, he flew 58 combat missions during World War II. On one mission over the Pacific as a torpedo bomber pilot he was shot down by Japanese antiaircraft fire and was rescued from the water by a U. S. submarine. He was awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross for bravery in action."

jochhejaam

08-17-2005, 11:00 PM

:lol

I was just pointing out the ridiculousness of someone running over a religious/spiritual symbol because he does no believe in the cause they represent.

Kinda like burning the American flag, no?

They took what were meant to be memorials to american soldiers killed in combat and shamelessly slammed them into the ground by a highway as a political stunt.

B-B-B-Bad to the Bone!

Trainwreck2100

08-18-2005, 12:46 AM

Of course, Horowitz is wrong, on every point. But it is difficult to get angry with him, or even to take his ranting seriously. When Reagan asked me if I wanted to "dignify" Horowitz's comments with a response, I declined, except to express a measure of sympathy for Horowitz and other true believers who have become so frenzied in their need to defend the Iraq imbroglio that they feel they must attack a grieving mother who wants to make sure that no more parents will have to bury their sons and daughters as a result of the Bush administration's arrogance.

Excuse my language, but that's horseshit. The minute she accepted celebrity she accepted all the responsibities that came with it(including being ridiculed). Her son didn't die so she could have carte blance on anything she says.

Marcus Bryant

08-18-2005, 12:53 AM

Some here seem to think that this shit really matters. Frankly, it's the reason a large portion of the population doesn't give a fuck about politics. Then again, I find myself on the outside of the cable "news"/blog/partisan nutjob newscycle looking in.

The weather sure is nice here.

Trainwreck2100

08-18-2005, 12:57 AM

Nbadan

08-18-2005, 03:35 AM

"She met Bush once, during his visit to Fort Lewis, Wash. She says she tried to show the president photos of Casey, but he wouldn't look at them. She says she asked him, "Mr. President, what did my son die for?" and he said, "I believe every person deserves to be free."

Ummm..That's not an answer - that's a non-answer, but at least you've helped proven that Cindy had reservations even then about the war.

Nbadan

08-18-2005, 03:45 AM

"On his 18th birthday he enlisted in the armed forces. The youngest pilot in the Navy when he received his wings, he flew 58 combat missions during World War II. On one mission over the Pacific as a torpedo bomber pilot he was shot down by Japanese antiaircraft fire and was rescued from the water by a U. S. submarine. He was awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross for bravery in action."

But do you know the history behind Bush41's Distinguished Flying Cross for Bravery in Action award?

Lt George Bush, then a 20-year-old pilot, was among nine airmen who escaped from their planes after being shot down during bombing raids on Chichi Jima, a tiny island 700 miles south of Tokyo, in September 1944 - and was the only one to evade capture by the Japanese.

The horrific fate of the other eight "flyboys" was established in subsequent war crimes trials on the island of Guam, but details were sealed in top secret files in Washington to spare their families distress.

Mr Bradley has established that they were tortured, beaten and then executed, either by beheading with swords or by multiple stab-wounds from bayonets and sharpened bamboo stakes. Four were then butchered by the island garrison's surgeons and their livers and meat from their thighs eaten by senior Japanese officers.

The future president escaped a similar fate because he ditched his plane further from the island than the other crews, and managed to scramble on to a liferaft. American planes launched a hail of fire at Japanese boats which set out to capture him, driving them back, and he was eventually rescued by a US submarine.

When the black hull of the USS Finback surfaced in front of him, he thought he was hallucinating, he told Mr Bradley in a television film made to coincide with the publication of Flyboys. He had been vomiting, bleeding from a head wound, and weeping with fear. He said only four words to his rescuers: "Happy to be aboard."

Mr Bush's part in the raid - for which he won the Distinguished Flying Cross - has long been known to Americans. Not known until now was the grim fate of his downed comrades - none from his own plane - who swam ashore.

Mr Bradley pieced together the horrific truth from secret transcripts of the war crimes trials, given to him by a former officer and lawyer who was an official witness at the time, and the testimony of surviving Japanese veterans.

A radio operator, Marve Mershon, was marched to a freshly dug grave, blindfolded, and made to kneel for beheading by sword, testified a Japanese soldier, named as Iwakawa, at the war crimes trial. "When the flyer was struck, he did not cry out, but made a slight groan."

The next day a Japanese officer, Major Sueo Matoba, decided to include American flesh in a sake-fuelled feast he laid on for officers including the commander-in-chief on the island, Gen Yoshio Tachibana. Both men were later tried and executed for war crimes.

A Japanese medical orderly who helped the surgeon prepare the ingredients said: "Dr Teraki cut open the chest and took out the liver. I removed a piece of flesh from the flyer's thigh, weighing about six pounds and measuring four inches wide, about a foot long."

Another crewman, Floyd Hall, met a similar fate. Adml Kinizo Mori, the senior naval officer on Chichi Jima, told the court that Major Matoba brought "a delicacy" to a party at his quarters - a specially prepared dish of Floyd Hall's liver.

According to Adml Mori, Matoba told him: "I had it pierced with bamboo sticks and cooked with soy sauce and vegetables." They ate it in "very small pieces", believing it "good medicine for the stomach", the admiral recalled.

A third victim of cannibalism, Jimmy Dye, had been put to work as a translator when, several weeks later, Capt Shizuo Yoshii - who was later tried and executed - called for his liver to be served at a party for fellow officers. Parts of a fourth airman, Warren Earl Vaughn, were also eaten and the remaining four were executed, one by being clubbed to death.

Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/10/26/wpow26.xml&sSheet=/news/2003/10/26/ixworld.html)

Nbadan

08-18-2005, 03:57 AM

W was in the military in Vietnam...he was in the reserves...just like Kerry...his reserve troup never got called into serve...and Daddy Bush did serve.

Kerry did two tours in nam. He volunteered for the second and didn't use his privilege to get out of serving his first tour of duty.

Nbadan

08-18-2005, 04:11 AM

It's in Texas, once football starts nobody will care.

Don't bet on it. Yes, someday this drama may move back to Washington DC were it belongs, but Cindy Sheehan isn't gonna just disappear. Like it or not, she has started a movement that until now has gone largely ignored by the corporate media and the apathetic, like Marcus Bryant, but those voices won't be ignored for much longer. Especially as the war in Iraq continues to spiral downward and our troops keep dying.

By the way, I was at one of those Sheehan prayer vigils held in Texas and I just gotta tell ya, the energy there was fantastic. There must have been about 100 people there supporting Mrs. Sheehan, and that was only at one vigil, there were hundreds around the world.

Dos

08-18-2005, 05:57 AM

I wonder what she thought while her son was still alive in a volunteer army, was she actively campaigning for him to get it... I'd like to ask her that question.

Clandestino

08-18-2005, 09:22 AM

Kerry did two tours in nam. He volunteered for the second and didn't use his privilege to get out of serving his first tour of duty.

:lmao we all know what kerry did in vietnam

cecil collins

08-18-2005, 09:42 AM

We all know what Bush didn't do.

Clandestino

08-18-2005, 09:46 AM

have you served in any capacity? what wars have you been in?

Jelly

08-18-2005, 11:02 AM

Kerry did two tours in nam. He volunteered for the second and didn't use his privilege to get out of serving his first tour of duty.

Two tours :lol While Kerry may be able to 'technically' claim 2 tours in Nam to puff up his resume, he should avoid doing so, since his "two tours", while sounding impressive, actually worked out to a total of 3 1/2 months. Lucky Kerry. He didn't have to serve the same kind of "two tours" that my Dad served. That translated to 2 years and 8 months in Vietnam. And by that I mean IN Vietnam.

MaNuMaNiAc

08-18-2005, 11:07 AM

Two tours :lol While Kerry may be able to 'technically' claim 2 tours in Nam to puff up his resume, he should avoid doing so, since his "two tours", while sounding impressive, actually worked out to a total of 3 1/2 months. Lucky Kerry. He didn't have to serve the same kind of "two tours" that my Dad served. That translated to 2 years and 8 months in Vietnam. And by that I mean IN Vietnam.
what does that have to do with anything? I mean, I applaud your dad for having had the will to get through an ordeal like that. God knows I would have had a mental breakdown lol. However, having served less time or more time is no way to measure a man.

Jelly

08-18-2005, 11:15 AM

what does that have to do with anything? I mean, I applaud your dad for having had the will to get through an ordeal like that. God knows I would have had a mental breakdown lol. However, having served less time or more time is no way to measure a man.

I'm not even judging Kerry for only serving 3 1/2 months. But call it what it is. 3 1/2 months. Making claims of "I served two tours" is totally misleading, makes him look silly, and is also a little insulting to those who did serve two tours (ie..two +years)

MaNuMaNiAc

08-18-2005, 11:17 AM

Trainwreck2100

08-18-2005, 01:12 PM

Don't bet on it. Yes, someday this drama may move back to Washington DC were it belongs, but Cindy Sheehan isn't gonna just disappear. Like it or not, she has started a movement that until now has gone largely ignored by the corporate media and the apathetic, like Marcus Bryant, but those voices won't be ignored for much longer. Especially as the war in Iraq continues to spiral downward and our troops keep dying.

By the way, I was at one of those Sheehan prayer vigils held in Texas and I just gotta tell ya, the energy there was fantastic. There must have been about 100 people there supporting Mrs. Sheehan, and that was only at one vigil, there were hundreds around the world.

The more she is there, the less I care. I was on her side in the beginning now she just pisses me off.

As for going to the vigil, were there hot chicks there? I've been thinking of going to one of those, were they the cool hippie chicks, or the fat ones.

Hook Dem

08-18-2005, 01:27 PM

Fat hippies are the worse kind, stuffing down red meat while they try to save the whales. I prefer my hippies to be slinder, horny, leaf eating tree hugging type.
:lol :lol :lol

Trainwreck2100

08-18-2005, 01:53 PM

Fat hippies are the worse kind, stuffing down red meat while they try to save the whales. I prefer my hippies to be slinder, horny, leaf eating tree hugging type.

Those fall under the cool hippie chicks, not expensive to feed and you don't have to do much to hit it.

Trainwreck2100

08-18-2005, 02:09 PM

That is correct Sir!!!

How could i forget the rich ones rebelling against their conservative parents.

Nbadan

08-18-2005, 02:19 PM

I'm not even judging Kerry for only serving 3 1/2 months. But call it what it is. 3 1/2 months. Making claims of "I served two tours" is totally misleading, makes him look silly, and is also a little insulting to those who did serve two tours (ie..two +years)

It's pretty clear that you've fallen for the Republican spin regarding Kerry's time in Vietnam. The guy was injured 3 times and received a Silver Cross and a purple hearts while putting his life up for his country so I think very few of us have the credibility to judge his actions in combat, especially when they are based largely on the word of a loud-mouth meglo-manic who skipped service in Nam because of a ass wart.

Marcus Bryant

08-18-2005, 02:49 PM

So Bush41 is a bad man because he escaped the fate of some other American flyboys in the Pacific.

How'd you map your trip to lunacy?

jochhejaam

08-18-2005, 03:08 PM

To be forwarded to Cindy Sheehan:

The Soldier's CreedI am an American Soldier.
I am a Warrior and a member of a team.
I serve the people of the United States and live the Army Values.
I will always place the mission first.
I will never accept defeat.
I will never quit.
I will never leave a fallen comrade.
I am disciplined, physically and mentally tough, trained and proficient in my warrior tasks and drills.
I always maintain my arms, my equipment and myself.
I am an expert and I am a professional.
I stand ready to deploy, engage, and destroy the enemies of the United States of America in close combat.
I am a guardian of freedom and the American way of life.
I am an American Soldier.

http://www.army.mil/SoldiersCreed/flash_version/

I know only two tunes: one of them is "Yankee Doodle," and the other isn't.
Ulysses S. Grant

Clandestino

08-18-2005, 03:11 PM

jochhejaam

08-18-2005, 03:22 PM

Jelly

08-18-2005, 03:27 PM

It's pretty clear that you've fallen for the Republican spin regarding Kerry's time in Vietnam. The guy was injured 3 times and received a Silver Cross and a purple hearts while putting his life up for his country so I think very few of us have the credibility to judge his actions in combat, especially when they are based largely on the word of a loud-mouth meglo-manic who skipped service in Nam because of a ass wart.

uhh... I said nothing about his actions in combat. I said he was only in Viet Nam for 3 1/2 months, which is a fact, not some partisan tripe. Look it up. As far as his injuries, they were minor enough that most soldiers wouldn't even consider themselves wounded. My Dad had a bullet in his left hand and still has scars on his forearm from schrapnel, but he never really considered himself as "wounded" or even put himself up for medals (as John Kerry did) because he didn't think his injuries were significant. Lots of guys had worse injuries than Kerry but didn't get medals because they felt the same way. I saw an interview with one of John Kerry's commanders who said he was surprised when he saw when Kerry reported his "injury" which the commander thought was too minor to even fill out paperwork for. Other people who served with him claim that one of his injuries was self-inflicted. No one really knows but the people who were there, but obviously there's a descrepancy.

I'm not saying Kerry should be ashamed of his service or that he would have been a better man had he sustained real injuries. I'm saying that he and his zombie followers should not exaggerate and try to fabricate or exploit Kerry's war record. It makes him look like a phony and it isn't even necessary. Neither Bush nor Clinton served in Vietnam.

As far as the loud-mouth megalomaniac(s) who have been passing judgment on Kerry's war record for the past thirty years (none of this is new)...Bush was not among them. The main guy who has been going after Kerry since the end of Vietnam is a swift boat vet. He, along with many other vets have been sworn Kerry haters since Kerry made accusations against his fellow soldiers in the early 70s.

BTW- spare me the republican spin crap. I voted for Kerry (but not with your brainwashed zombie enthusiasm) and even I recognize phony, bullshit war stories when I hear them.

Nbadan

08-18-2005, 03:27 PM

So Bush41 is a bad man because he escaped the fate of some other American flyboys in the Pacific.

How'd you map your trip to lunacy?

Bush41 is a bad man because everywhere he went opium and herion become lucrative markets, just like his son, but that's another story.

Nbadan

08-18-2005, 03:33 PM

uhh... I said nothing about his actions in combat. I said he was only in Viet Nam for 3 1/2 months, which is a fact, not some partisan tripe. Look it up. As far as his injuries, they were minor enough that most soldiers wouldn't even consider themselves wounded. My Dad had a bullet in his left hand and still has scars on his forearm from schrapnel, but he never really considered himself as "wounded" or even put himself up for medals (as John Kerry did) because he didn't think his injuries were significant. Lots of guys had worse injuries than Kerry but didn't get medals because they felt the same way. I saw an interview with one of John Kerry's commanders who said he was surprised when he saw when Kerry reported his "injury" which the commander thought was too minor to even fill out paperwork for. Other people who served with him claim that one of his injuries was self-inflicted. No one really knows but the people who were there, but obviously there's a descrepancy.

You do know that for a Silver Cross you have to be referred by your commanding officer, right? Also, Kerry's injuries may have been minor comparatively, but at least he put his ass on the line when his country needed him. Where was George?

Self-inflicted injuries, what a joke.

Nbadan

08-18-2005, 03:35 PM

As far as the loud-mouth megalomaniac(s) who have been passing judgment on Kerry's war record for the past thirty years (none of this is new)...Bush was not among them. The main guy who has been going after Kerry since the end of Vietnam is a swift boat vet. He, along with many other vets have been sworn Kerry haters since Kerry made accusations against his fellow soldiers in the early 70s.

Bush is never among them because he has Rove's media shills to do smearing jobs for him. Just like they are attempting to do to Cindy Sheehan

Nbadan

08-18-2005, 04:02 PM

In a statement released today, Rush Limpballs is denying that he ever compared Cindy Sheehan to Bill Burkett even though Media Matters has his quote verbatim...

On the August 17 broadcast of The Rush Limbaugh Show, nationally syndicated radio host Rush Limbaugh falsely claimed his August 15 comments about Cindy Sheehan, the mother of a soldier who died in Iraq, were being misreported. Media Matters for America noted that on his August 15 broadcast, Limbaugh compared Sheehan to Bill Burkett, the retired Texas Air National Guard officer who provided CBS' 60 Minutes with unauthenticated documents regarding President Bush's National Guard record, arguing that "her story is nothing more than forged documents."

Media Matters documented Limbaugh's statement:

LIMBAUGH: I mean, Cindy Sheehan is just Bill Burkett. Her story is nothing more than forged documents. There's nothing about it that's real, including the mainstream media's glomming onto it. It's not real. It's nothing more than an attempt. It's the latest effort made by the coordinated left.

But on the August 17 broadcast of The Rush Limbaugh Show, Limbaugh falsely claimed that his comments were being misreported:

LIMBAUGH: Let me take a brief time out here to address something. I have been the recipient of a pretty decent amount of hate mail, far, far, far more hate mail than I usually get. Just this morning -- and I don't really get a whole lot of hate mail. And most of it's funny as it can be. But apparently there is something that is out there misreporting what I have said. And of course, these people are reading that rather than listening to this program and choosing to believe it.

Apparently, what's out there is that I said that Cindy Sheehan is no different than Bill Burkett, that Bill Burkett lied and Cindy Sheehan lied. They're actually out there, people saying that I am accusing Cindy Sheehan of making up the fact that she had a son and making up the fact that her son died in Iraq. And of course, I've never said this. That I, early on in this, if you wanna go back -- and we'll post the archives on my website tonight just to illustrate this. I'm the one that actually expressed a little compassion for her. And I said I don't really wanna talk too much about her, particularly because she's lost a son here. And that can never be easy. And I don't care -- there are all kinds of different people that have all kinds of different reactions to this. But losing a child is the absolute worst thing that can happen to an adult. There's nothing that rivals it, in my estimation.

So the idea that I think that she's making it all up is just another sign of the desperation of the people on the left who love to take us all out of context to try to get their side riled up. What I said was that the media looks at her the same way they look at Bill Burkett, as an opportunity. It didn't matter whether Burkett was telling the truth or not, and it doesn't matter what the specifics of Cindy Sheehan's case are. She is protesting Bush, Burkett hated Bush. That's why they're attractive to the media, and that's why the media is willing to exploit her.

Limbaugh himself featured his original statement on his website as a "Members Only" quote:

Jelly

08-18-2005, 04:07 PM

Bush is never among them because he has Rove's media shills to do smearing jobs for him. Just like they are attempting to do to Cindy Sheehan

Well, Rove's media shills must have some kind of secret time-machine. Obviously, they went back 36 years and had the military doctor smear him on his report of Kerry's "combat" wound...

"What I saw was a small piece of metal sticking very superficially in the skin of Kerry's arm. The metal fragment measured about 1 cm. in length and was about 2 or 3 mm in diameter. It certainly did not look like a round from a rifle.

I simply removed the piece of metal by lifting it out of the skin with forceps. I doubt that it penetrated more than 3 or 4 mm. It did not require probing to find it, did not require any anesthesia to remove it, and did not require any sutures to close the wound.

The wound was covered with a bandaid.
Not [sic] other injuries were reported and I do not recall that there was any reported damage to the boat."

a further account of this incident..

The following morning, John Kerry arrived at the office of Coastal Division 14 Commander Grant Hibbard to apply for a Purple Heart. Having already been informed by Schachte[Kerry's commander] that Kerry's injury was self-inflicted rather than the result of hostile fire, Commander Hibbard told him to "forget it." Hibbard recently said of Kerry's minor scratch, "I’ve seen worse injuries from a rose thorn." :lol

But Kerry was persistent, and several months later after he was transfered to another unit, he applied yet again and finally managed to get a purple heart for his little owie.

Clandestino

08-18-2005, 04:13 PM

i tell you Bush is capable of everything according to the haters of the most powerful nation on earth...

hussker

08-18-2005, 05:27 PM

Here is a good one....
Margot Kidder, a Canadian citizen (formerly), just got her US Citizenship today after living here for 34 years! Wanna know why?

So she will not be deported when she begins protesting the war.

The greatest country in the world!
I might not agree with your opinion but I will fight for you so you can speak it!

hussker....A retired USAF Officer, 1982 - 2005

whottt

08-18-2005, 05:34 PM

This the same Margot Kidder that was found a few years ago wandering around incoherent, amnesiatic, and in a state of dementia right? Sounds about par for the Democratic course these days...

Not as great as Hanoi Jane about to go around touring the country to protest the war and support the troops though...in her million dollar veggie mobile showing the peasantry how to be a good liberal and protect the environment, right before she takes her private gaz guzzling jet for her European vacation....tee hee.

But nothing beats a group of girls calling themselves the "Dixie" chicks becoming the champions of the left. Fucking classic.

Jelly

08-18-2005, 05:36 PM

as if she'd get deported for protesting. if that's the reason she gave, then she's hallucinating again. needs to get back on her meds.

Nbadan

08-18-2005, 11:08 PM

as if she'd get deported for protesting. if that's the reason she gave, then she's hallucinating again. needs to get back on her meds.

:lmao

I could tell you stories about Margo Kidder.

Nbadan

08-19-2005, 01:04 PM

Day 13: Camp Casey

A letter from a Cindy Sheehan supporter in Crawford:

Friends,

I had promised a few people that I would write about why I was going to Crawford before I left. I thought that I would be able to do that on the first day I got here --- I was wrong. I have been incredibly busy as the person drafted to be the Crawford Peace House volunteer coordinator that I don’t think I’ve gotten to post anything in about 3 days. I apologize for the void in communication, and I realize people are wanting to know about what’s going on!

First, Cindy and Dede’s Mom is okay, considering she had a stroke ---- it was not life threatening. Dede (Cindy’s sister) will stay with her from here on out, and Cindy should be back by tomorrow. There’s no such thing as good timing when it comes to something like that, but this weekend is particularly trying because they are trying to move the encampment at the site to the plot of land that a lone sympathetic rancher has so kindly allowed the vigil keepers to stay on. In addition, Amy Goodman just got here last night, in addition to an AirAmerica affiliate from San Diego. There are celebrities scheduled to arrive here this weekend besides Lance Armstrong; unfortunately, I am not at liberty to say who they are. Because Crawford is so small, it has been a real struggle to be able to handle the influx of people coming to the Peace House and Camp Casey from a logistical point of view, so advertising who may show up is not being pushed right now. Just handling the parking situation is an ongoing challenge because the House is actually located on the main road going in to Crawford, and they are without a parking lot. Many of the neighbors are not exactly thrilled by our presence, so coming up with space can often be a headache. Add that to food, porta potties, water, ice……. Well, you get the idea.

But that’s not why I’m writing this. Let me just tell you a quick story illustrating a part of the why.

A few days ago, one of the two mail carriers that deliver mail in town whispered to our Parking Queen, Barbara (from San Diego), that any mail that only had “Crawford Peace House” without the actual numbered address, was being ‘returned to sender.’ Apparently, the Crawford Post Office was in the habit of holding on to the mail and then every now and then, sending them back to the people who had written either Cindy or CPH. Barbara, a retired postal worker, informed me that while that was technically possible, to do so was a real indication of their attitude towards what was happening here. After a few well placed phone calls to various Congressional reps, Postal Inspectors from Dallas and regional offices paid a visit to the post office here in town. It’s true many pieces of mail were returned to people, but we found out that a large amount had also just gone back to the main Dallas-Ft Worth Post Office. It was just sitting there.

Johnny Wolfe, one of the co-founders of the Peace House went to the DFW office to pick the lot that had been sent back. When he walked into the place, he noticed that AirAmerica was cranked up in the front receiving area of the office. After he introduced himself at the counter and informed them that he was there to pick up the mail, the entire facility, including the processing center in the back, stopped and came to the front. They cheered and roared their approval in the loudest Texas fashion for everyone in Crawford who was there to take it to Bush. News of this brought tears to a few of us back at the House. I can’t begin to adequately describe what it’s meant to get that kind of support. When I think of how difficult it’s been, I just think of those moments that I couldn’t even begin to imagine reading in a story.

Experiences like that have shown me that people everywhere, not just those that have gone out of their way to come here, are with us (and by that I mean all of you reading this, as well). Most of America truly understands that there is no light at the end of this dark, foul tunnel --- they want it to stop ----- and stop before it goes elsewhere…..

I am asking everyone who is reading this to please, please --- bring this subject up now and at the conferences. Talk about this! I know we have the special election to deal with (I’ve already walked precincts), and the issue of electoral integrity is major, but we can’t let the issue of the war and occupation get away from us. It is bankrupting us in blood and treasure. As DFAers, we have an obligation to continue to raise difficult questions ---- and demand they be answered for the sake of making us and the Party better than it is now. To continue this silence for strategy’s sake is morally impoverished as a part of a vision for ‘taking our country back’. Choosing to not decide IS a choice.

Get this rolling! TALK! I’m going to really try to steal some moments where I can type today, but I’m already off to the first event of the day: the National Council of Churches will have an Interfaith Service at noon. 300 clergy bused in from everywhere will be at the site to lend solidarity to the efforts of the brave souls who have stuck in out in the unbearable heat.

Talk to you all soon,

karen

You can e-mail Karen in Crawford at: <[email protected] >

Nbadan

08-19-2005, 01:15 PM

MIA

http://us.news3.yimg.com/us.i2.yimg.com/p/rids/20050814/i/r1197876261.jpg

Where's Bush?

President has not been seen publicly since August 13th Waco Little League softball game.

Useruser666

08-19-2005, 01:21 PM

Great Dan, you've uncovered the fact that the US postal service is innefficient! Next, you'll be telling us that the city council takes bribes.

Nbadan

08-19-2005, 04:20 PM

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v173/meekssandygirl/cindy2.jpg

http://www.cagle.com/working/050816/britt.gif

http://www.cagle.com/working/050816/cagle00.gif

http://www.cagle.com/working/050815/matson.jpg

http://www.cagle.com/working/050815/keefe.gif

Dos

08-19-2005, 05:15 PM

unfortunetly she's become the tool for some ultra left wingers, believe me you parade out the anti war demonstraters and sane rational people tend to give up, it would be like the right alway parading out jerry falwell and pat robertson... extremism doesn't work no matter what side of the aisle it's from.

Cindy Sheehan: 35% Favorable 38% Unfavorable
Survey of 1,000 Adults
August 17-18, 2005
Cindy Sheehan
Favorable 35%
Unfavorable 38%
RasmussenReports.com

Following Sheehan Story
Very Closely 25%
Somewhat Closely 30%
Not Very Closely 27%
Not At All 15%
RasmussenReports.com

August 19, 2005--Cindy Sheehan, the grieving mother who maintained an anti-War protest outside of President Bush's ranch, is viewed favorably by 35% of Americans and unfavorably by 38%.
Sheehan is viewed favorably by 34% of men and 35% of women. Forty-two percent (42%) of men and 34% of women have an unfavorable view.
In general, people see in Sheehan what they want to see. Opinion about her is largely based upon views of the War, rather than views about the woman herself. Democrats, by a 56% to 18% margin, have a favorable opinion. Republicans, by a 64% to 16% margin, have an unfavorable view. Those not affiliated with either major party are evenly divided.
People who think we should withdraw troops from Iraq now have a positive opinion of Sheehan (59% favorable, 12% unfavorable). Those who do not think we should withdraw troops at this time have a negative view (15% favorable , 64% unfavorable).
Among those with family members who have served in the military, Sheehan is viewed favorably by 31% and unfavorably by 48%.

Forty-two percent (42%) of Married Americans have an unfavorable opinion of Sheehan while 33% have a favorable opinion. Among those who are not married, Sheehan's numbers are 38% favorable and 30% favorable.
Fifty-five percent (55%) of Americans say they are following the Sheehan story somewhat or very closely. That is a lower level of interest than Americans have in stories about Iran's nuclear capabilities. It is roughly comparable to the interest in stories about Supreme Court nominee John Roberts.
News reports said that Sheehan left Texas yesterday (Thursday) to be with her mother who had suffered a stroke. Sheehan vowed to return as soon as possible.
Demographic details available for Premium Members.
Rasmussen Reports is an electronic publishing firm specializing in the collection, publication, and distribution of public opinion polling information.
Rasmussen Reports was the nation's most accurate polling firm during the Presidential election and the only one to project both Bush and Kerry's vote total within half a percentage point of the actual outcome.
During Election 2004, RasmussenReports.com was also the top-ranked public opinion research site on the web. We had twice as many visitors as our nearest competitor and nearly as many as all competitors combined.
Scott Rasmussen, president of Rasmussen Reports, has been an independent pollster for more than a decade.
To keep up with our latest releases, be sure to visit the Rasmussen Reports Home Page.

Jimcs50

08-19-2005, 05:44 PM

Bush says the war is "worth the sacrifice". For whom? I would like to see if he would send his daughters over to Iraq amidst the fighting...then let us see if he thinks this quagmire is worth the sacrifice. Fuck no, he would not let his daughters die for oil or because he wants to spread freedom.

Bush is nothing but a lying, special interest grabbing flag waving con man.

If not for oil interests, we would not be there. Whottt, you know that and yet, you hide behind your "patriotism" and just act like this is all just, and that is wrong.

We are wanting to "spread freedom" all around the world.....that is BULLSHIT. There are hundreds of countries that are under the same type of tyrrany as Iraq is, but they have nothing of interest to us, we have nothing to gain either monetarily or politically by freeing these people, so we just shake our heads and say, "how tragic", yet we do nothing for them militarily.

We have allienated over 90% of our allies, bcause they know the real reason why we are over there....am I am sick of it.

Greed, plain and simple.

Fuck Bush and his adminstration.

whottt

08-19-2005, 05:52 PM

Jimcs50

08-19-2005, 09:42 PM

Yeah Jim and those countries not sitting on billlions of dollars in Oil don't have billions of dollars to develop nukes with...

On top of that none of them had invaded another country and signed a UN cease fire agreement that they had violated.

Where are the WOMD????

Why are we still there?????

Would Bush let his daughters die for this cause???

Answer those questions?

Jelly

08-19-2005, 10:02 PM

whottt

08-19-2005, 10:20 PM

Careful Jelly...Jim will threaten to beat your ass if you press the issue.

Jelly

08-19-2005, 10:23 PM

Careful Jelly...Jim will threaten to beat your ass if you press the issue.

you mean he would hit a girl...that's sad :depressed

whottt

08-19-2005, 10:26 PM

Being a girl may cause a different reaction from him.

JoeChalupa

08-19-2005, 10:28 PM

Any man would be proud to give his only son for democracy.

Dos

08-20-2005, 06:54 AM

I knew I liked jelly for some reason...... now I know..

Jimcs50

08-20-2005, 07:57 AM

Any man would be proud to give his only son for democracy.

I would hate to be your son.

That is the most pathetic, idiotic utterance that I have ever ever seen in my life.

I am sad for your children. I hope you do not have children, and if you don't then please get a vasectomy. You are a freak.

You would let your child die to bring democracy to another country, a country that hates our guts???

romsho

08-20-2005, 08:11 AM

[QUOTE=Jimcs50]Bush says the war is "worth the sacrifice". For whom? I would like to see if he would send his daughters over to Iraq amidst the fighting...then let us see if he thinks this quagmire is worth the sacrifice. Fuck no, he would not let his daughters die for oil or because he wants to spread freedom.

Bush is nothing but a lying, special interest grabbing flag waving con man.

If not for oil interests, we would not be there. Whottt, you know that and yet, you hide behind your "patriotism" and just act like this is all just, and that is wrong.

We are wanting to "spread freedom" all around the world.....that is BULLSHIT. There are hundreds of countries that are under the same type of tyrrany as Iraq is, but they have nothing of interest to us, we have nothing to gain either monetarily or politically by freeing these people, so we just shake our heads and say, "how tragic", yet we do nothing for them militarily.

We have allienated over 90% of our allies, bcause they know the real reason why we are over there....am I am sick of it.

Greed, plain and simple.

Fuck Bush and his adminstration.[/QUOTE

Exactly. Well done, Jim. I was beginning to associate the word "Patriot" with things like sheep and towing the company line. Your post was very refreshing.

Jimcs50

08-20-2005, 08:18 AM

why do people persist with such idiotic, melodramatic schmaltz like "would so-and-so send their sons to die"? As if we live in some bizaare, mythical world where parents actually send their adult offspring to wars. No, Bush nor anyone else can send their children to war. Those "children" in question are grown-ups and they are allowed to *gasp* make their own decisions. I find this paternalistic attitude toward full grown men and women really nauseating (and kind of weird). And I'm really glad we live in a world where my parents are not allowed to send me places.

Jelly, it is apropos in this situation. Do you understand?? Do you have a fucking brain???

Bush stated 3 wks ago that "this war is worth the sacrifice." What has HE sacrificed???? I asked the question about HIS kids, because he does not know what it is like to lose a child in battle. How does HE know that this oil war is worth losing a child, worth the sacrifice?????????????

How dare he say that this is worth the sacrifice, when he has lost NOTHING in this war. Fuck his smug attitude.

He avoided going to an equally unjust war in Vietnam, had his dad not pulled some strings, he might have found out first hand what sacrifice really is.

You people are ignorant simpletons, that believe whatever the party says...you are no smarter than the Germans that followed the Nazis in their political propaganda in the 30s.

Think for yourselves for a change...read....use your fucking brains.......if you have any left.

They say we are doomed to repeat history if we do not learn from history, well, this is another Viet Nam, it is a war being waged for one reason, and that is for monetary gain, and our sons and daughters, mothers and fathers and dying for it.

Another reaon to oppose this fucked up war is we are losing well trained soldiers of our special forces, soldiers that are not just drafted grunts, like we lost in Nam. These soldiers are SEALs, Rangers and Delta Company soldiers...these people are trained to protect us in counter terrorism, these men are being wasted in this God forsaken country. We will not have enough of these specialists left to fight against the REAL enemy, al-Qaeda. We are spreading ourselves thin, and the real enemy is taking note, believe me.

Jimcs50

08-20-2005, 08:22 AM

Clandestino

08-20-2005, 08:25 AM

Clandestino

08-20-2005, 08:31 AM

Exactly. Well done, Jim. I was beginning to associate the word "Patriot" with things like sheep and towing the company line. Your post was very refreshing.

The sheep are the ones who don't want to do shit. They want to follow the UN. It is hard to see why anyone would follow the UN when you see they had their hands in all sorts of illegal activities in Iraq. No wonder they didn't want us to enforce the laws in Iraq.

Did you not care that our planes were being fired on for the prior 10 years before Desert Storm II? Did you think it was okay for Saddam to be trying to shoot our planes down?

romsho

08-20-2005, 08:35 AM

STFU! Were you asking Clinton to send Chelsea to Bosnia, Kosovo, etc... We are still there.

You mixed Clinton into the discussion. Amazing. Hence the problem of separating true issues from politics. For some of you, it is impossible.

romsho

08-20-2005, 08:41 AM

The sheep are the ones who don't want to do shit. They want to follow the UN. It is hard to see why anyone would follow the UN when you see they had their hands in all sorts of illegal activities in Iraq. No wonder they didn't want us to enforce the laws in Iraq.

Did you not care that our planes were being fired on for the prior 10 years before Desert Storm II? Did you think it was okay for Saddam to be trying to shoot our planes down?

No A-hole, the sheep are the ones who do whatever their leaders say without question, no matter how fucked up it may be. I know that is a difficult concept for you, but try your best to understand it.

Clandestino

08-20-2005, 08:43 AM

You mixed Clinton into the discussion. Amazing. Hence the problem of separating true issues from politics. For some of you, it is impossible.

The UN didn't approve of Kosovo, but Clinton got us into a war that we are still in NOW. Soldiers are killed there too. Did he or you require that Clinton send Chelsea?

Also, like Jelly said, how the fuck is someone going to send their adult child anywhere? :lmao too fucking funny!

Clandestino

08-20-2005, 08:45 AM

No A-hole, the sheep are the ones who do whatever their leaders say without question, no matter how fucked up it may be. I know that is a difficult concept for you, but try your best to understand it.

Well, Iraq is similar to Kosovo.
Kosovo Iraq
People were being killed by a tyrant.. X X
Country firing at US Planes X X
UN didn't care X X
etc... X X

Jelly

08-20-2005, 11:58 AM

Jelly, it is apropos in this situation. Do you understand?? Do you have a fucking brain???

Bush stated 3 wks ago that "this war is worth the sacrifice." What has HE sacrificed???? I asked the question about HIS kids, because he does not know what it is like to lose a child in battle. How does HE know that this oil war is worth losing a child, worth the sacrifice?????????????

How dare he say that this is worth the sacrifice, when he has lost NOTHING in this war. Fuck his smug attitude.

He avoided going to an equally unjust war in Vietnam, had his dad not pulled some strings, he might have found out first hand what sacrifice really is.

You people are ignorant simpletons, that believe whatever the party says...you are no smarter than the Germans that followed the Nazis in their political propaganda in the 30s.

Think for yourselves for a change...read....use your fucking brains.......if you have any left.

They say we are doomed to repeat history if we do not learn from history, well, this is another Viet Nam, it is a war being waged for one reason, and that is for monetary gain, and our sons and daughters, mothers and fathers and dying for it.

Another reaon to oppose this fucked up war is we are losing well trained soldiers of our special forces, soldiers that are not just drafted grunts, like we lost in Nam. These soldiers are SEALs, Rangers and Delta Company soldiers...these people are trained to protect us in counter terrorism, these men are being wasted in this God forsaken country. We will not have enough of these specialists left to fight against the REAL enemy, al-Qaeda. We are spreading ourselves thin, and the real enemy is taking note, believe me.

Jim,
you are an ignorant jackass. Are you just not capable of grasping the idea that there are more than two positions to take on Iraq... Extreme right and extreme left? Do you not have the cognitive skills to view the war as a more complex situation or do you have to reduce everything to tired old cliches.....Bush is evil, it's only about oil, would you send your son...blah, blah,blah.

I agree that we are spreading our military thin, but it doesn't do anything for the debate when you resort to grossly exaggerated claims like we are losing all our special forces and we won't have anyone left to protect Americans on the mainland. You're a flaming idiot and arrogant asshole if you think everyone who isn't screeching your kind of exaggerated, doomsday rhetoric is some pro-Bush chickenhawk republican that can't read or think for themselves. I happen to be against this war, asshole. But I don't share your simplistic brainwashed view that Bush is the devil incarnate and that the administration are his evil disciples. No do I believe that the war has been the apocalyptic "disaster" that unhinged leftwing fear mongers keep screaming about. Take your own advice and do some reading...something other than leftwing websites, experiment with thinking on your own, without all the liberal propaganda to prop up your arguments...it'll feel strange at first but you'll get used to it.

JohnnyMarzetti

08-20-2005, 12:12 PM

I wonder is Bush has ever said to his daughters..."You are with me or against me. Now go enlist because we must stay the course and if that bitch Sheehan can lose a son I can damn sure lose a daughter for this great cause."

Nbadan

08-20-2005, 03:11 PM

Two more Gold Star Families are heading to Crawford to fill in for Sheehan...

Evelyn Allen and Patricia Roberts, two mothers who lost their sons to the war in Iraq, are on their way to Texas, demanding to see President Bush. (Story) (http://11alive.com/news/news_article.aspx?storyid=68052) What will the pack of hyenas say about these ladies? What type of dirt will they dig up? More exploitation? Are they tax cheats? Will the great Malkin speak for their dead kids?

What will they say? They haven't met with Bush. Will there be more coverage from the press? Will Bill O'Reilly call them traitors? Will Rush Limbaugh call them fakes?

Daily Kos (http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/8/19/181341/859)

whottt

08-20-2005, 03:25 PM

Jimcs50

08-20-2005, 03:37 PM

If moveon and Michael Moore really wanted them to suceed in their quest they'd disassociate from those women. Getting a bunch of hate filled lefties to support them is just about the worst thing they can do to gain the ear of the American Public.

And don't you guys have some mexicans to racially discriminate against anyway?

Oh wait...you're too busy discriminating against those "savage Iraqis" that can't be civilized and don't deserve to live except under the boot of tyranny and opression.....

Whottt, why should we Americans die for Iraqis???

The US has never ever gone to war just to save another country from oppression. Look it up.

There are literally hundreds of oppressed countries in the world....do we go into each of them and spread freedom????

Hellno.

Jimcs50

08-20-2005, 03:40 PM

whottt

08-20-2005, 03:57 PM

Whottt, why should we Americans die for Iraqis???

The US has never ever gone to war just to save another country from oppression. Look it up.

There are literally hundreds of oppressed countries in the world....do we go into each of them and spread freedom????

Hellno.

Jim...how many of those countries lie in a region of the world that is the birth place of an ideology that has declared war upon us, invaded another country, lost a war and violated the cease fire agreement they signed a dozen times since signing it, thus ending the ceasefire agreement, and have the financial assets to develop WMD?

Give me that list....c'mon expert...see if you can do it without threatening me...

And that is the 4,090,012,345,675,079,456,678,768 time I have posted that....see if you can be the first anti to exhibit some kind of linear thought capability....

whottt

08-20-2005, 04:00 PM

Jelly, you do not understand a single thing.

What is you educational background? Community college, yes?

I have learned that you can not have any type of argument for a moron, so I will not answer to your idiotic thoughts any more.

Yeah Jelly...Jim's dentistry education makes him more knowledgable on world politics than you...because as we all know...the world is really nothing but a big mouth.

Maybe someday Jim will realize that sometimes you just got to yank the fucking tooth out.

Dos

08-20-2005, 04:04 PM

man how soon they forget it's a VOLUNTEER ARMY ....[B]

Jimcs50

08-20-2005, 04:45 PM

Jim...how many of those countries lie in a region of the world that is the birth place of an ideology that has declared war upon us, invaded another country, lost a war and violated the cease fire agreement they signed a dozen times since signing it, thus ending the ceasefire agreement, and have the financial assets to develop WMD?

Give me that list....c'mon expert...see if you can do it without threatening me...

And that is the 4,090,012,345,675,079,456,678,768 time I have posted that....see if you can be the first anti to exhibit some kind of linear thought capability....

The govt is no more...they are not a threat to us any longer. Sadam is in jail.

Do you understand????

Do you know that more al Qaeda terrorists have come from Saudi Arabia (icluding the most wanted all off of them) and Africa than any other areas of the world??

Whottt, how naive can you be???

Name one terrorist that has come from Iraq that is of any consequence.

Why are we not cracking down on the country that has supplied more money and men into terrorism than every other country? You know why? Because George Bush is in bed with the leader of Saudi Arabia, King Fahd, that is why.Saudi Arabia is a monarchy without elected representative institutions or political parties....do we give a shit???

We were allies with Iraq and Sadam at one time against Iran, after the Shah was overthrown. Do you know that the Shah and his policies made Sadam look like Mr Rogers in comparison?? He was a tyranical dictator who had thousands of people killed who opposed him. Yet, he was our "friend" so it was alright and we turned a blind eye toward him. He was not a bad man *wink wink*, he was a great man, blah blah blah.

Mohammad Reza, Shah to the Peacock Throne ultimately sparked the Islamic Revolution of 1979. The Islamic Revolution, in turn, inspired fundamentalists throughout the Muslim world, including the Taliban and terrorists who thrived under its protection.

When Ayatolla Khomeini took over in Iran in 79, we switched over to Iraq as our "ally" because we were booted out of Iran and no longer got our greedy paws on Iranian oil.

Do you not see the trend here??? We are in bed with the Saudi govt because we make millions of dollars off their oil, even though they are an oppressed people(women have no rights what so ever), but they are playing ball with us, so we again turn a blind eye to their oppression.

How is that for "linear" thought???

And whottt, I had 4 yrs of college at a very fine academic institution, where I carried a 3.6 GPA, prior to dental school. It was there where I learned about a vast array of subject matter including political science and history, so I do think I am well qualified to think along a linear line.

What are YOUR academic qualifications???

:lol

j-6

08-20-2005, 05:24 PM

STFU! Were you asking Clinton to send Chelsea to Bosnia, Kosovo, etc... We are still there.

Republican voices
"You can support the troops but not the president."
--Rep Tom Delay (R-TX)

"Well, I just think it's a bad idea. What's going to happen is they're going to be over there for 10, 15, maybe 20 years."
--Joe Scarborough (R-FL)

"Explain to the mothers and fathers of American servicemen that may come home in body bags why their son or daughter have to give up their life?"
--Sean Hannity, Fox News

"[The] President . . . is once again releasing American military might on a foreign country with an ill-defined objective and no exit strategy. He has yet to tell the Congress how much this operation will cost. And he has not informed our nation's armed forces about how long they will be away from home. These strikes do not make for a sound foreign policy."
--Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA)

"If we are going to commit American troops, we must be certain they have a clear mission, an achievable goal and an exit strategy."
--Karen Hughes, speaking on behalf of George W Bush

"I had doubts about the bombing campaign from the beginning . . I didn't think we had done enough in the diplomatic area."
--Senator Trent Lott (R-MS)

"I cannot support a failed foreign policy. History teaches us that it is often easier to make war than peace. This administration is just learning that lesson right now. The President began this mission with very vague objectives and lots of unanswered questions. A month later, these questions are still unanswered. There are no clarified rules of engagement. There is no timetable. There is no legitimate definition of victory. There is no contingency plan for mission creep. There is no clear funding program. There is no agenda to bolster our over-extended military. There is no explanation defining what vital national interests are at stake. There was no strategic plan for war when the President started this thing, and there still is no plan today"
--Rep Tom Delay (R-TX)

"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is."
--Governor George W. Bush (R-TX)

Republicans denouncing Clinton for committing troops to Bosnia.

whottt

08-20-2005, 05:33 PM

The govt is no more...they are not a threat to us any longer. Sadam is in jail.
So let's just pull out and create Afghanistant part 2...just let another despot take over...rendering every death there meaningless.

Do you understand????

Do you?

Do you know that more al Qaeda terrorists have come from Saudi Arabia (icluding the most wanted all off of them) and Africa than any other areas of the world??

Hmmm...Pakistan may have the edge on the Saudies...

And guess who is supplying those terrorists we are fighting in Iraq?

You think Saudis want a Shia dominated country in that region?

Whottt, how naive can you be???

Name one terrorist that has come from Iraq that is of any consequence.

Saddam Hussein.

Why are we not cracking down on the country that has supplied more money and men into terrorism than every other country? You know why? Because George Bush is in bed with the leader of Saudi Arabia, King Fahd, that is why.Saudi Arabia is a monarchy without elected representative institutions or political parties....do we give a shit???

What are we supposed to do? Invade a charter memeber of the UN that is a member in full standing? That has invaded no other countries?

The home land of Islam...

Yeah...Brilliant idea there Jim...

And we have put pressure on them to Westernize for decades.

We were allies with Iraq and Sadam at one time against Iran, after the Shah was overthrown. Do you know that the Shah and his policies made Sadam look like Mr Rogers in comparison?? He was a tyranical dictator who had thousands of people killed who opposed him. Yet, he was our "friend" so it was alright and we turned a blind eye toward him. He was not a bad man *wink wink*, he was a great man, blah blah blah.

False...your 4 year dentistry education has left you ignorant both of the Shah, what his intentions were, why he became oppressive, and why we allied with him....Go check your history.

Mohammad Reza, Shah to the Peacock Throne ultimately sparked the Islamic Revolution of 1979. The Islamic Revolution, in turn, inspired fundamentalists throughout the Muslim world, including the Taliban and terrorists who thrived under its protection.

False...it started with the PLO...backed by the Russians...which is what dictated our alliance with Israel...

Why are we allied with Israel? They have no Oil.

Why did we go into Korea and Vietnam? They have no Oil.

Why did we ait the Radicals in Afghanistan...Afghanistan has no Oil.

When Ayatolla Khomeini took over in Iran in 79, we switched over to Iraq as our "ally" because we were booted out of Iran and no longer got our greedy paws on Iranian oil.

I think it was the hostage and we are the great Satan thing that got the Iranians in hot water with us...

Do you think that is a just regime in Iran?

Have you looked at the things they do?

They make the Shah look like Santa Claus.

Do you not see the trend here??? We are in bed with the Saudi govt because we make millions of dollars off their oil, even though they are an oppressed people(women have no rights what so ever), but they are playing ball with us, so we again turn a blind eye to their oppression.

How is that for "linear" thought???

Pretty crappy...every country in the middle east is a shithole...but we do not have legal cause, created by the violation of a cease fire agreement, to go into those countries and remove their leaders....and we have supported countries that have no Oil many times in the past.

And the reason we are allied with who we are allied with......are remnants of the cold war. Not because we love tyrants...check our history.

And better yet...check what is going on in the middle east right now...in terms of Democratic reform and free elections...check Saudi Arabia even.

And whottt, I had 4 yrs of college at a very fine academic institution, where I carried a 3.6 GPA, prior to dental school. It was there where I learned about a vast array of subject matter including political science and history, so I do think I am well qualified to think along a linear line.

What are YOUR academic qualifications???

:lol

I have a degree in Anthropology.

whottt

08-20-2005, 05:40 PM

Jimcs50

08-20-2005, 05:55 PM

So let's just pull out and create Afghanistant part 2...just let another despot take over...rendering every death there meaningless.

Do you?

Hmmm...Pakistan may have the edge on the Saudies...

And guess who is supplying those terrorists we are fighting in Iraq?

You think Saudies want a Shia dominated country in that region?

Saddam Hussein.

What are we supposed to do? Invade a charter memeber of the UN that is a member in full standing? That has invaded no other countries?

The home land of Islam...

Yeah...Brilliant idea there Jim...

And we have put pressure on them to Westernize for decades.

False...your 4 year dentistry education has left you ignorant both of the Shah, what his intentions were, why he became oppressive, and why we allied with him....Go check your history.

False...it started with the PLO...backed by the Russians...which is what dictated our alliance with Israel...

Why are we allied with Israel? They have no Oil.

Why did we go into Korea and Vietnam? They have no Oil.

Why did we ait the Radicals in Afghanistan...Afghanistan has no Oil.

I think it was the hostage and we are the great Satan thing that got the Iranians in hot water with us...

Do you think that is a just regime in Iran?

Have you looked at the things they do?

They make the Shah look like Santa Claus.

Pretty crappy...every country in the middle east is a shithole...but we do not have legal cause, created by the violation of a cease fire agreement, to go into those countries and remove their leaders....and we have supported countries that have no Oil many times in the past.

And the reason we are allied with who we are allied with in our history in the mideast......are remnants of the cold war. Not because we love tyrants...check our history.

And better yet...check what is going on in the middle east right now...in terms of Democratic reform and free elections...check Saudi Arabia even.

I have a degree in Anthropology.

I am not saying invade Saudi Arabia, you are clueless. I am saying that we are hypocrits because the Saudi govt is just as oppressive and tyranical as Iraq was, yet we have no reason to invade them because we already have many Western fingers in their oil pie. YOU UNDERSTAND THAT!!!???

Why allied with Isreal????

You are even dumber than I thought. if you have to ask that question. Helloooo???? Jewish money owns our politicians...that is why.

:rolleyes

The PLO had very little to do with Ayatolla Khomeini's takover, the fundamentalists took over because of the Shah's policies and his secular govt and because of his tyranical dictatorship, not to mention his love affair with Western idealogies and politicians who were making millions off their countries resources.

Pakistan might have terrorists but they are not being funded by the Pakistani govt. We will do nothing to Pakistan because the have nukes and we are smart enough to leave that alone.

As far as Afganistan, we only gave a shit about them because Osama was hiding there after 911 and the Taliban had terrorist training camps there, otherwise, they would have been left alone by our govt. Politics dictated that we invade Afganistan....otherwise they were left alone.

Anthropology?

Well, your ancestors can study our people a million yrs form now and try to figure out how we all died...it will be because of greed...Republican greed.

Jimcs50

08-20-2005, 05:58 PM

Again...if all we wanted was Oil...what makes you think we couldn't have gotten it from Saddam?

And we don't use as much of that Oil as the rest of the World does....

I can see the argument for saying we are supporting corrupt regimes by Cana da being our leading Oil import partner...I can't see you saying it based on the mid-east.

Go find out where France and Germany get their Oil from...they are 100% dependent on Oil imports. We aren't.

France has no fucking oil...duh!

WTF else are they going to get it from???

Whottt, why do you THINK we care about oppression in Iraq. when we never cared about it when we were allies with Iran????

Can you NOT SEE THIS!!!????

Spam

08-20-2005, 06:00 PM

Having a degree don't mean shit.

Look at Bush.

Jimcs50

08-20-2005, 06:09 PM

Jimcs50

08-20-2005, 06:16 PM

Having a degree don't mean shit.

Look at Bush.

Bush was drunk and stoned his whole college enrollment.

He is not too bright, and is probably the dumbest president in our history.

Had he not come from a rich and powerful family, he would be a drunken bum or at best a blue collar worker living from paycheck to paycheck.

whottt

08-20-2005, 06:22 PM

France has no fucking oil...duh!

WTF else are they going to get it from???

Whottt, why do you THINK we care about oppression in Iraq. when we never cared about it when we were allies with Iran????

Can you NOT SEE THIS!!!????

We did care about oppression in Iran...we put pressure on the Shah for Democratic reform...in fact he was doing it.

whottt

08-20-2005, 06:24 PM

Whottt, do me a favor and go to Barnes and Noble and buy "All The Shah's Men," by Stephen Kinzer. You can learn how a covert CIA operation( operation Ajax) caused the overthrow of the elected Iranian govt in the 50's, putting the Shah in power. The Shah's repressive regime directly led to the Islamic Revolution which in turn gave rise to the climate that caused 911.

Um...the Shah was in power before the CIA even existed..

and that elected government we "overthrew" was one that he put in power that was trying to overthrow him.

And it also wasn't an Islamic Government.

Our government can give a shit less about oppressed people...our history, if you will read it, will show you that.

False. You need to read our history. You are wrong.

Money and power is what drives the US govt...and if you do not see that, you are naive and ignorant.

Please read that book!!!

Yeah we made a ton of money in Afghanistan didn't we....

And what do you think drives every government?

Nearly every alliance we made since WWII was related to the Coldwar.

Jimcs50

08-20-2005, 06:30 PM

We did care about oppression in Iran...we put pressure on the Shah for Democratic reform...in fact he was doing it.

:jack

Do you want to buy some swamp land from me?

Whottt, you are digging yourself a hole that is getting deeper and deeper. Admit that our govt will jump in bed with anyone, if our special interests are served....please stop being so fucking ignorant...please....I really thought you were an intelligent man before I read your blind, follow the company line discourse in this thread.

The Shah would still be killing people and we would still be turning a blind eye to it had the 79 revolution not happened.

Jimcs50

08-20-2005, 06:38 PM

Um...the Shah was in power before the CIA even existed..

and that elected government we "overthrew" was one that he put in power that was trying to overthrow him.

And it also wasn't an Islamic Government.

False. You need to read our history. You are wrong.

Yeah we made a ton of money in Afghanistan didn't we....

And what do you think drives every government?

Nearly every alliance we made since WWII was related to the Coldwar.

Stop using Afganistan as an example of our compassion!!!!

Helloooo!!!!

We did nothing for them at all until Osama retreated there after 911.

We gave aid to the mujadeen only because the USSR was fighting them and we always fought on the other side as the USSR. After the Soviet Union withdrew, we left Afganistan high and dry with very little aid at all. Yes???

The Shah was overthrown because of his being a dictator, a ruthless one, one of the top 5 worst dictators as far as human rights policies in the last 50 yrs.

READ your history!!!

Jimcs50

08-20-2005, 06:39 PM

I am going to the movies now.

Peace, out.

:)

Jimcs50

08-20-2005, 06:51 PM

Jim,
you are an ignorant jackass. .

Jane...er Jelly, you ignorant slut......

Have a good night.

:)

whottt

08-20-2005, 07:35 PM

Stop using Afganistan as an example of our compassion!!!!

Um...standing up against communist expansion and the loss of individual freedom is our fucking compassion...show me another country that's had more.

We did nothing for them at all until Osama retreated there after 911.

False, we gave them what they needed to defeat the Russians.

We gave aid to the mujadeen only because the USSR was fighting them and we always fought on the other side as the USSR. After the Soviet Union withdrew, we left Afganistan high and dry with very little aid at all. Yes???

That's because all of the lefties would have bitched about us installing a puppet regime if we hadn't.

The Shah was overthrown because of his being a dictator, a ruthless one, one of the top 5 worst dictators as far as human rights policies in the last 50 yrs.

Bullshit...the only ones the Shah was a dictator to were those that were trying to overthrow him...

IE the Islamic Revolution....do you see what they do in that country now...Go there..

READ your history!!!

I know....while you...to steal a phrase from Spurminator once again...sound like a left wing blog on autopilot.

Jimcs50

08-20-2005, 11:10 PM

The 40 Yr old Virgin is freaking hilarious.

2 thumbs up!

That's because all of the lefties would have bitched about us installing a puppet regime if we hadn't.

Whottt, are you seriously this naive?

What the fuck does Afganistan have that we want? Nothing. That is why we left.

Now, had heroin been legal in this country in the 80s, then yes, we would have stayed there and stolen all the poppy fields and place American drug companies there where they could be making billions of dollars on that product. But since it is a God forsaken wasteland which has no natural resourses that we can exploit, we left them without so much as a bandaid to stop the bleeding after their war with the Soviets.

Wake the fuck up and use your fucking brain for a change.

:rolleyes

Jimcs50

08-20-2005, 11:38 PM

We didn't put the Shah power...this is something I see every fucking liberal say...and it amazes me how ignorant they are of history. We did not put the Shah of Iran in power. We did not do it. We didn't put him in power...we didn't put his father in power. -Whottt

READ your history!!!!

The US did put the Shah in power, for many reasons, one of which was Iran's border with the Soviet Union, as almost every US foreign policy move since WWII involved the USSR. A pro-American Iran under the Shah would give the U.S. a double strategic advantage in the ensuing Cold War, as a NATO alliance was already in effect with the government of Turkey, also if you did not know whottt also borders USSR.
In planning their covert operation, the CIA organized a guerrilla force in case the Stalinist Party seized power as a result of the chaos created by Operation Ajax. "Top Secret" documents released by the National Security Archive, showed that the CIA had reached an agreement with tribal leaders in southern Iran to establish a clandestine safe haven from which U.S.-funded guerrillas and intelligence agents could operate.

Operation Ajax was the first time the Central Intelligence Agency orchestrated a plot to overthrow a democratically-elected government.

This is all in the public record Whottt....just read it for yourself and stop with all this naivette that you are showing with your every post.

Widespread dissatisfaction with the oppressive regime of the reinstalled Shah led to the 1979 Islamic Revolution in Iran and the occupation of the US embassy.

As a condition of restoring the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company the U.S. was able to dictate that the AIOC's oil monopoly should lapse. Five major U.S. oil companies, plus Royal Dutch Shell and French Compagnie Française des Pétroles were given licences to operate in the country alongside AIOC.

The U.S. involvement in the fall of Mossadegh was not publicly acknowledged until five years ago. In a New York Times article in March 2000, then-Secretary of State Madeleine Albright admitted that "the coup was clearly a setback for Iran's political development. And it is easy to see now why many Iranians continue to resent this intervention by America in their internal affairs."

No, Whottt, oil had nothing to do with the Shah and his tyranical regime starting up again.

Again...READ YOUR HISTORY!!!

Jimcs50

08-21-2005, 12:05 AM

I found this on Kinzer's book. This was an interview done on the 50th anniversary of the coup.

TRANSCRIPT
AMY GOODMAN: Well, it's good to have you with us. Stephen Kinzer, why don't we begin with you. This month, August 2003, 50 years ago, the C.I.A. orchestrated a coup against the democratically elected government of Mohammad Mossadegh. Can you briefly tell us the story of how this took place?

STEPHEN KINZER: This was a hugely important episode, and looking at it from the prospective of history, we can see that it really shaped a lot of the 50 years that have followed since then in the Middle East and beyond. But yet, it's an episode that most Americans don't even know happened. As I was writing my book, I had the sense that I was dredging up an incident that had been largely forgotten. During my work, I realized early on that Mossadegh, the prime minister of Iran, had been the Man of the Year for Time magazine in 1951. And after I realized that, I went to some trouble and I finally located a copy of that Time magazine. And I framed it, and I have it up on my wall. And it gave me the feeling that, not only am I digging up this episode again, but I'm bringing back to life this figure of Mossadegh. He was really a huge figure in the world of mid-century. This was a time, bear in mind, before the voice of the Third World, as we now call it, had ever really been raised in world councils. This was a time before Castro, before Nkrumah, before Sukharno, before Nasser. Mossadegh actually showing up in New York and laying out Iran's case and by extension the case of poor nations against rich nations was something very, very new for the whole world. And what a figure he was. This book is full of amazing characters. Not just Kermit Roosevelt, the guy who planned the coup. But Mossaugh--tall, sophisticated, European-educated aristocrat--but also highly emotional, a guy who would start sobbing and sometimes even faint dead away in Parliament when giving speeches about the suffering of the Iranian people. When he embraced the national cause of that period, which was the nationalization of the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company, he set himself on a collision course with the great powers in the world. And that collision has produced effects which we're still living with today.

AMY GOODMAN: Talk about the Anglo- Iranian Oil Company.

STEPHEN KINZER: The Anglo-Iranian Oil Company arrived in Iran in the early part of the twentieth century. It soon struck the largest oil well that had ever been found in the world. And for the next half-century, it pumped out hundreds of millions of dollars worth of oil from Iran. Now, Britain held this monopoly. That meant it only had to give Iran a small amount--it turned out to be 16 percent--of the profits from what it produced. So the Iranian oil is actually what maintained Britain at its level of prosperity and its level of military preparedness all throughout the '30s, the '40s, and the '50s. Meanwhile, Iranians were getting a pittance, they were getting almost nothing from the oil that came out of their own soil. Naturally, as nationalist ideas began to spread through the world in the post-World War II era, this injustice came to grate more and more intensely on the Iranian people. So they carried Mossadegh to power very enthusiastically. On the day he was elected prime minister, Parliament also agreed unanimously to proceed with the nationalization of the oil company. And the British responded as you would imagine. Their first response was disbelief. They just couldn't believe that someone in some weird faraway country--which was the way they perceived Iran--would stand up and challenge such an important monopoly. This was actually the largest company in the entire British Empire. When it finally became clear that Mossadegh was quite serious, the British decided to launch an invasion. They drew up plans for seizing the oil refinery and the oil fields. But President Truman went nuts when he heard this and he told the British, under no circumstances can we possibly tolerate a British invasion of Iran. So then the British went to their next plan, which was to get a United Nations resolution demanding that Mossadegh return the oil company. But Mossadegh embraced this idea of a U.N. debate so enthusiastically that he decided to come to New York himself and he was so impressive that the U.N. refused to adopt the British motion. So finally, the British decided that they would stage a coup, they would overthrow Mossadegh. But what happened, Mossadegh found out about this and he did the only thing he could have done to protect himself against the coup. He closed the British embassy and he sent all the British diplomats packing, including, among them, all the secret agents who were planning to stage the coup. So now, the British had to turn to the United States. They went to Truman and asked him, please overthrow Mossadegh for us. He said no. He said the C.I.A. had never overthrown a government and, as far as he was concerned, it never should. So, now, the British were completely without resources. They couldn't launch an invasion, the U.N. had turned down their complaint, they had no agents to stage a coup. So they were stymied. It wasn't until November of 1952 when British foreign office and intelligence officials received the electrifying news that Dwight Eisenhower had been elected president that things began to change. They rushed one of their agents over to Washington. He made a special appeal to the incoming Eisenhower administration. And that administration reversed the Truman policy agreed to send Kermit Roosevelt to Tehran to carry out this fateful coup.

AMY GOODMAN: When we come back from our break, we'll find out just what Kermit Roosevelt, the grandson of Teddy Roosevelt, and Norman Schwarzkopf, the father of the man who led the Persian Gulf War, Norman Schwarzkopf, did in Iran. Stay with us. We're talking to Stephen Kinzer. He's author of All the Shah's Men: An American Coup and the Roots of Middle East Terror. [¶MUSIC BREAK¶]

AMY GOODMAN: You are listening to Democracy Now!, the War and Peace Report. I'm Amy Goodman on this 50th anniversary of the C.I.A.-backed coup that overthrew the democratically elected prime minister of Iran, Mohammad Mossadegh. We're talking to Stephen Kinzer. He is author of a new book, All the Shah's Men: An American Coup and the Roots of Middle East Terror. In a minute, we're going to go to old film about the coup where former C.I.A. agents talk about their role in it. But talk about the man in the C.I.A. who spearheaded this, Kermit Roosevelt.

STEPHEN KINZER: One of the reasons I wanted to write this book was because I've always been curious about exactly how you go about overthrowing a government. What do you do after you choose an agent and assign a lot of money? Exactly how do you go about doing it? Kermit Roosevelt really is a wonderful way to answer that question. What happened was this: Kermit Roosevelt, who as you said was Teddy Roosevelt's grandson, was the Near East director for the C.I.A. He slipped clandestinely into Iran just around the end of July 1953. He spent a total of less than three weeks in Iran--that's only how long it took him to overthrow the government of Mossadegh. And one thing that I did realize as I was piecing together this story is how easy it is for a rich, powerful country to throw a poor, weak country into chaos. So what did Roosevelt do? The first thing he did was he wanted to set Tehran on fire. He wanted to make Iran fall into chaos. So he bribed a whole number of politicians, members of Parliament, religious leaders, newspaper editors and reporters, to begin a very intense campaign against Mossadegh. This campaign was full of denunciatory speeches and lies about Mossadegh, dated and passed, without bitter denunciations of Mossadegh from the pulpits and in the streets, on the houses of Parliament. Then, Roosevelt also went out and bribed leaders of street gangs. You had a kind of "Mobs 'R' Us," mobs-for-hire, kind of situation existing in Iran that that time. Roosevelt got in touch with the leaders of these mobs. Finally, he also bribed a number of military officers who would be willing to bring their troops in on his side at the appropriate moment. So when that moment came, the fig leaf of the coup was, as you said, this document that the Shah had signed, rejecting the prime ministership of Mossadegh, essentially firing him from office. Now, this was a decree that was of very dubious legality since in democratic Iran only the Parliament could hire and fire prime ministers. Nonetheless, the idea was that this decree would be delivered to Mossedegh at his house at midnight one night and then, when he refused to obey it, as he probably would, he would be arrested. That was the plot. But what happened was that the officer that Kermit Roosevelt had chosen to go to Mossdegh's house at midnight, presented the decree firing Mossadegh and preparing to arrest him but other, loyal soldiers stepped out of the shadows and arrested him. The coup had been betrayed. The plot failed. The man who was supposed to arrest Mossadegh was himself arrested. And Kermit Roosevelt woke up the next day with a cable from his superiors in the C.I.A. telling him, My God, you failed, you better get out of there right away before they find you and kill you. But Kermit Roosevelt, on his own, decided that he would stay. He figured, I can still do this, I was sent here to overthrow this government, I'm going to make up my own plan.

AMY GOODMAN: Now he had had help before from Norman Schwarzkopf, is that right, Schwarzkopf's father?

STEPHEN KINZER: There's a fantastic cast of characters in this story and one of them is Norman Schwarzkopf, who had been the head of the investigation into the Lindhburg kidnapping while with the New Jersey state police, had spent many years in Iran during the 1940s, and was a very flamboyant figure with great influence on the Shah. He was one of the people that Kermit Roosevelt brought in to pressure the timid Shah into signing this fateful decree. Now, the decree finally failed to have its desired effect, as I said. And then Roosevelt on his own devised this plan where, first of all, he sent rioters out into the streets to pretend that they were pro-Mossadegh. They were supposed to yell "I love Mossadegh and communism. I want a people's republic!" and then loot stores, shoot into mosques, break windows, and generally make themselves repugnant to good citizens. Then he hired another mob to attack his first mob, thereby creating the impression that Iran was falling into anarchy. And finally on the climactic day, August 19, 1953, he brought all his mobs together, mobilized all of his military units, stormed a number of government buildings and then, in the climactic gunbattle at Mossadegh's house, a hundred people were killed until finally the coup succeeded, Mossadegh had to flee and was later arrested, and the Shah, who had fled in panic at the first sign of trouble a few days earlier, returned in triumph to Tehran and began what became 25 years of increasingly brutal and repressive rule.

AMY GOODMAN: That issue of the U.S. government funding both the people in the streets who pretended that they were for Mossadegh but communist, and against Mossadegh, pro-Shah, I would like our guest, professor Ervand Abrahamian, Middle East and Iran expert at Baruch College, to comment on. This was a time, the British had used the ruse of anti-communism supposedly to lure in the U.S. Do you think the U.S. was fully well aware of the issue of oil being at the core of this, and also them possibly getting a cut of those oil sales.

ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: Yes, I think oil is the central issue. But of course this was done at the height of the Cold War, so much of the discourse at the time linked it to the Cold War. I think many liberal historians, including of course Stephen Kinzer's wonderful book here, even though it's very good in dealing with the tragedy of the '53 coup, still puts it in this liberal framework that the tragedy, the original intentions, were benign.--that the U.S. really got into it because of the Cold War and it was hoodwinked into it by the nasty British who of course had oil interests, but the U.S. somehow was different. U.S. Eisenhower's interest, were really anti-communism. I sort of doubt that interpretation. For me, the oil was important both for the United States and for Britain. It's not just the question of oil in Iran. It was a question of control over oil internationally. If Mossadegh had succeeded in nationalizing the British oil industry in Iran, that would have set an example and was seen at that time by the Americans as a threat to U.S. oil interests throughout the world, because other countries would do the same. Once you have control, then you can determine how much oil you produce in your country, who you sell it to, when you sell it, and that meant basically shifting power from the oil companies, both British Petroleum, Angloversion, American companies, shifting it to local countries like Iran and Venezuela. And in this, the U.S. had as much stake in preventing nationalization in Iran as the British did. So here there was not really a major difference between the United States and the British. The question really was on tactics. Truman was persuaded that he could in a way nudge Mossadegh to give up the concept of nationalization, that somehow you could have a package where it was seen as if it was nationalized but, in reality, power would remain in the hands of Western oil companies. And Mossadegh refused to go along with this facade. He wanted real nationalization, both in theory and practice. So the Truman administration, in a way, was not that different from the British view of keeping control. Then, the Truman policy was then, if Mossadegh was not willing to do this, then he could be shoved aside through politics by the Shah dismissing him or the Parliament in Iran dismissing him. But again, it was not that different from the British view. Where the shift came was that after July of '52, it became clear even to the American ambassador in Iran that Mossadegh could not be got rid of through the political process. He had too much popularity, and after July '53, the U.S. really went along with the British view of a coup, indeed to have a military coup. So even before Eisenhower came in, the U.S. was working closely with the British to carry out the coup. And what came out of the coup was of course the oil industry on paper remained Iranian, nationalized, but in reality it was controlled by a consortium. In that consortium the British still retained more than 50 percent, but the U.S. got a good 40 percent of that control.

AMY GOODMAN: I said at the top, this month marks the 50th anniversary of America's first intervention in the Middle East. I should have said, of America's first overthrow of a democratically elected government. But, Stephen Kinzer, the statement that you make in your book, it is not far-fetched to draw a line from Operation Ajax, which the U.S. had called the coup through the Shah's repressive regime and the Islamic revolution to the fireballs that engulfed the World Trade Center in New York. Can you flush that out?

STEPHEN KINZER: The goal of our coup was to overthrow Prime Minister Mossadegh and place the Shah back in his throne. And we succeeded in doing that. But from the perspective of decades of history, we can look back and ask whether what seemed like a success really was a success. The Shah whom we brought back to power became a harsh dictator. His repression set off the revolution of 1979, and that revolution brought to power a group of fanatic anti-Western, religious clerics whose government sponsored acts of terror against American targets, and that government also inspired fundamentalists in other countries including next door, Afghanistan, where the Taliban came to power and gave sanctuary to Al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden. So, I think you can--while it's always difficult to draw direct cause and effect lines in history--see that this episode has had shattering effects for the United States. And let's consider one other of the many negative affects this has had. When we overthrew a democratic government in Iran 50 years ago, we sent a message, not only to Iran, but throughout the entire Middle East. That message was that the United States does not support democratic governments and the United States prefers strong-man rule that will guarantee us access to oil. And that pushed an entire generation of leaders in the Middle East away from democracy. We sent the opposite message that we should have sent. Instead of sending the message that we wanted democracy, we sent a message that we wanted dictatorship in the Middle East, and a lot of people in the Middle East got that message very clearly and that helped to lead to the political trouble we face there today.

AMY GOODMAN: Right after the Shah was deposed by the Ayatollah Khomeini and the Iranian revolution of 1979 and then the Iranian students took over the U.S. embassy, I'm wondering, Professor Abrahamian, how often did the press, and understanding through the hundreds of days that the hostages were held, go back to the 1953 coup and explain the fears of the students that in 1953 the Shah had fled thinking that the coup had been fought back and the U.S. brought him back and that now that Jimmy Carter had allowed him into the United States, that they might be staging another possible coup, leading the students to fear this and to take the hostages.

ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: I think on this issue actually you see a big cultural gap between the American public and the Iranian public. For the Iranian public, the '53 coup shapes basically Iranian history, as Stephen shows very much in his book. But for Americans, the '53 coup was something unreal for them. It wasn't something they were aware of. If they were aware it, it was like Jimmy Carter saying that this was ancient history. For the U.S. it may have been ancient history but for Iranians it was not. So when the students took over the embassy, they actually called it the "den of spies" because they knew that in '53 the coup had been actually plotted from the U.S. compound. So they were--

AMY GOODMAN: That very building that they took over.

ERVAND ABRAHAMIAN: That very building. And that, for Iranians, was a central issue. In the United States, if you watch how the media covered it here, it saw the hostage crisis as Iranian emotional rampaging mobs in the streets calling for death of America and the '53 coup was intentionally not brought into that context. So you can go for reams of programs on the main channels in the United States about the hostage crisis, which lasted 444 days, and you rarely get the mention of the '53 coup. This was intentional. The media here did not want to make that link to '53.

AMY GOODMAN: Well, we're going to go right now back to an older documentary that very much lays out what happened in '53, with interestingly enough, former C.I.A. agents. I want to thank you, Professor Abrahamian, for being with us from Baruch College, and Steven Kinzer, author of the new book, All the Shah's Men: An American Coup and the Roots of Middle East Terror. Stay with us.

Nbadan

08-21-2005, 12:49 AM

All this is nothing new, well, except for Whott. The US likes to make sure it never loses in the Middle East by hedging it's bets on both sides on any conflict. Iraq-Iran, Palestinians-Israel, Egypt-Israel, Jordan-Israel, the list goes on and on and on.

No matter what happens we win.

Nbadan

08-21-2005, 02:47 AM

Day 15: Camp Casey

Thanks to a generous land-owner who felt sorry for Cindy sleeping in a ditch, AND Cindy Sheehan supporters, Camp Casey has gone from this:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v700/ATD941/accountability2.jpg

To this:

http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a219/foxoutlaw/Picture013.jpg

http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a219/foxoutlaw/Picture009.jpg

http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a219/foxoutlaw/Picture016.jpg

I'm telling ya folks, there's soming special happening here...

Nbadan

08-21-2005, 03:02 AM

In the latest article from Truthout.org by Cindy Sheehan (http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/082005X.shtml) fires back at critics...

Hypocrites and Liars
By Cindy Sheehan
t r u t h o u t | Letter
Saturday 20 August 2005

The media are wrong. The people who have come out to Camp Casey to help coordinate the press and events with me are not putting words in my mouth, they are taking words out of my mouth. I have been known for sometime as a person who speaks the truth and speaks it strongly. I have always called a liar a liar and a hypocrite a hypocrite. Now I am urged to use softer language to appeal to a wider audience. Why do my friends at Camp Casey think they are there? Why did such a big movement occur from such a small action on August 6, 2005?

I haven't had much time to analyze the Camp Casey phenomena. I just read that I gave 250 interviews in less than a week's time. I believe it. I would go to bed with a raw throat every night. I got pretty tired of answering some questions, like: "What do you want to say to the President?" and "Do you really think he will meet with you?" However, since my mom has been sick I have had a chance to step back and ponder the flood gates that I opened in Crawford, Tx.

I just read an article posted today on LewRockwell.com by artist Robert Shetterly who painted my portrait. The article reminded me of something I said at the Veteran's for Peace Convention the night before I set out to Bush's ranch in my probable futile quest for the truth. This is what I said:

I got an email the other day and it said, "Cindy if you didn't use so much profanity ... there's people on the fence that get offended.

And you know what I said? "You know what? You know what, god damn it? How in the world is anybody still sitting on that fence?

If you fall on the side that is pro-George and pro-war, you get your ass over to Iraq, and take the place of somebody who wants to come home. And if you fall on the side that is against this war and against George Bush, stand up and speak out.

Oh yes she did go there.

boutons

08-21-2005, 04:01 AM

War Backers Set Up Camp Near Bush Ranch

By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

Filed at 2:57 a.m. ET

CRAWFORD, Texas (AP) -- A patriotic camp with a ''God Bless Our President!'' banner sprung up downtown Saturday, countering the anti-war demonstration started by a fallen soldier's mother two weeks ago near President Bush's ranch.

The camp is named ''Fort Qualls,'' in memory of Marine Lance Cpl. Louis Wayne Qualls, 20, who died in Iraq last fall.

''If I have to sacrifice my whole family for the sake of our country and world, other countries that want freedom, I'll do that,'' said the soldier's father, Gary Qualls, a friend of the local business owner who started the pro-Bush camp. He said his 16-year-old son now wants to enlist, and he supports that decision.

(evolution at work, taking stupidity out of the gene pool. The bogus Iraq war was conceived strictly at as Repug 2004 re-election ploy, has NOTHING to do with the "sake of our country and world", you ignorant sonofabitch. )

Qualls' frustration with the anti-war demonstrators erupted last week when he removed a cross bearing his son's name that was among hundreds the group had put up along the road to Bush's ranch.

Qualls called the protesters' views disrespectful to soldiers, and said he had to yank out two more crosses after protesters kept replacing them.

(asshole. What's disrespectful of the soldliers is wasting the lives of US forces in a bogus war. Being against the Repugs and the war is the most soldier-respectful position. The Repugs have abused the US forces and lives for their own domestic political ends. shrub has shit on the soldiers and the flag. THAT's disprectful. )

Cindy Sheehan, whose 24-year-old son, Army Spc. Casey Sheehan, died last year in Iraq, started the anti-war demonstration along the roadside on Aug. 6. ''Camp Casey'' has since grown to about 100 core participants, and hundreds more from across the nation have visited.

Sheehan vowed to remain there until Bush agreed to meet with her or until his monthlong vacation ended, but she flew to Los Angeles last week after her 74-year-old mother had a stroke. Her mother has some paralysis but is in good spirits, and if she improves, Sheehan may return to Texas in a few days, some demonstrators said.

In her absence, the rest of the group will keep camping out for the unlikely chance to question the president about the war that has claimed the lives of about 1,850 U.S. soldiers.

Bush has said he sympathizes with Sheehan but won't change his schedule to meet with her. She and other families met with Bush about two months after Casey Sheehan died, before she became a vocal opponent of the war.

Large counter-protests were held in a ditch near Sheehan's site a week after she arrived, and since then, a few Bush supporters have stood in the sun holding signs for several hours each day.

Bill Johnson, a local gift shop owner who created ''Fort Qualls,'' said he wanted to offer a larger, more convenient place for Bush supporters to gather.

He and others at ''Fort Qualls'' have asked for a debate with those at the Crawford Peace House, which is helping Sheehan.

It's unclear if that will happen. But a member of Gold Star Families for Peace, co-founded by Sheehan and comprised of relatives of fallen soldiers, said her group would not participate.

''We're asking for a meeting with the president, period,'' said Michelle DeFord, whose 37-year-old son, Sgt. David W. Johnson, was in the Army National Guard from Oregon when he was killed in Iraq last fall. ''We don't want to debate with people who don't understand our point of view.''

whottt

08-21-2005, 04:12 AM

Jim...you must have flunked Political Science...because it seems your entire knowledge of the Iranian situation is based on that interview.

You don't know shit.

The Shah became the leader of Iran in 1941....it was he that allowed the Democratic Reform that allowed the fucking Iranians to have fair elections in the first place. And he was following the path of his father.

That entire article neglects to mention the role that the Russians played in Iran after WWI until well after WWII, not to mention their alliance with the Russians after the Islamic revolution.

You don't seem to understand that nationalizing an industry like that is Socialism...

Put it this way....Iran's Oil industry has been nationalized for 25 years now...how's that working out for them?

They have 40% unemployment and you can be imprisoned for being a Christain...you can be executed for being gay...

Yeah that's a real great improvement...

I never figured you for an Islamofascist but I guess now we know...

I'll tell you what I said in the first place...you need to study the history of Iran and not just parrot the propaganda...

Oh...and hey...who was the first country Iran allied itself with after the Islamic revolution? Russia.

Who originally funded the PLO? Russia.

You think you know but you don't...and yeah...Eisenhower was a real Oil monger...that's why he went after all that Oil in Vietnam.

Check out the White Revolution....

Then tell me who the brutal and opressive regime is.

Or better yet...just go find someone from Iran and talk to them...and ask them under which situation they were better off....Shah or Islam...

It's a fucking joke that every one calls the Shah's regime brutal compared to the regime that is running the country now.

Fucking learn some history.

Go look at what goes on in Iran now.

Trainwreck2100

08-21-2005, 04:44 AM

If you fall on the side that is pro-George and pro-war, you get your ass over to Iraq, and take the place of somebody who wants to come home. And if you fall on the side that is against this war and against George Bush, stand up and speak out.

Got to love the it's one or the other argument, I'm anti-bush and pro war mostly because shit is so fucked up over their because of what we have done to the place it would be horrible to just pull everyone out. If she must know why her son had to die, it's because he swore an oath to follow the president of the United States, it doesn't say he needed to know why he had to go it just says he has to do it blindly, if people don't want to follow the pres., it's easy, it's called a dishonorable discharge.

whottt

08-21-2005, 04:55 AM

whottt

08-21-2005, 05:14 AM

''We don't want to debate with people who don't understand our point of view.''

So they think W understand their point of view?

And boutons...that was a nice article but it would have been better if you could have kept those turds you call thoughts out of the middle of it.

I noted you calling that patriotic man stupid....as well as his little boy...

And on their behalf I'd just like to say fuck you.

You are one of those fucking scumbags that spit on US soldiers coming back from Vietnam...you just hide it well.

Point proved that you are an anti-American...just like 99% of the rest of the left.

JohnnyMarzetti

08-21-2005, 06:55 AM

cecil collins

08-21-2005, 08:20 AM

You are one of those fucking scumbags that spit on US soldiers coming back from Vietnam...you just hide it well.

Point proved that you are an anti-American...just like 99% of the rest of the left.

How does he hide it well if 99% of the left are anti-american? I'm gonna say that 99% of the left would be anti-you. :fro I don't like emoticons.

Jimcs50

08-21-2005, 11:15 AM

Or better yet...how about if you are anti-war you shut the fuck up and let the VOLUNTEERS fight their fucking battle without you aiding and abetting the enemy...it's not like you are over there fighting, it is a VOLUNTEER military, and Casey RE-ENLISTED AFTER THE IRAQ WAR HAD STARTED...so shut the fuck up and let those that want to fight for this country do so. No one is forcing you you to fight, you have no draft card to burn...so stick Vietnam up your commie ass and either go fight against the US military man to man instead of doing it on the soil they are defending and giving you the right to be a terrorist sympathizing scumbag or STFU...those that VOLUNTARILY ENLIST in the Miltary do so with the full knowledge that they might be sent into to a war.

These are kids that enlisted in the service. Yeah it is volunteer, but had they known what kind of quagmire they were getting into, 50% of them would never have enlisted.

It is NOT volunteer to go to Iraq...Big difference there pal.

You STFU you stupid piece of crap, you fucking big man hiding behind a computer, sitting on your big fat white ass who is so easy to allow our young people go and die for NOTHING but big business.

You go enlist and fight if you are so quick to allow others to do so.

No, you are a pussy a pussy who lets others fight for you.

"commie ass"?? What a total loser you are to use that term to describe people that have a brain and speak out against the wrongs in the world.

Stop me if I am wrong, but last I checked. the Communists were not allowed to speak out against a wrong doing govt...so how can you equate a Commie with what we are doing????
\
I made straight As in Political Science as well as History, so do not tell me anything about the Shah and the Peacock regime.

The Soviets were involved with Iran because they are on their Southern border, you freaking numnuts and they needed access to the Gulf...it made perfect sense, you freaking moron.

Jimcs50

08-21-2005, 11:26 AM

The Shah became the leader of Iran in 1941....it was he that allowed the Democratic Reform that allowed the fucking Iranians to have fair elections in the first place. And he was following the path of his father.

Wrong!!

One of my best friends who is a DDS( we were in school together) grew up in Iran during the Shah's regime and since he was a Bahai, not a Muslim, his family was persecuted, arrested and killed. He escaped with his parents in 1972 and immigrated to the US because they had family here. In the 20 + yrs that I have known him, I have learned all about Iran's history and what it was like before the Shah and after the Shah. I was told horror stories that you can not even imagine....this is why I hated that freak. I know all about the Shah and his tyranny, so do not dare tell me anything different, you fucking smug prick.

Call him up and talk to him. I will PM you his name and number....

Spurminator

08-21-2005, 11:32 AM

evolution at work, taking stupidity out of the gene pool.

LOL... Boutons calls out "shrub loving repugs" whose kids aren't enlisting, and then when he finds one who is, it's Nature weeding out stupid people.

I bet you wouldn't send that same sentiment to an actual soldier's family, would you, you fucking coward?

Do the anti-war crowd a favor and keep your opinions to yourself.

Nbadan

08-22-2005, 01:25 AM

and Casey RE-ENLISTED AFTER THE IRAQ WAR HAD STARTED

And we now know from Cindy Sheehan that Casey re-enlisted because he felt he an obligation to help his comrades still in Iraq. A real hero.

Cindy wants to ask the President what ‘noble cause’ her son had to die for, not why her son died.

Jimcs50

08-22-2005, 08:15 AM

And we now know from Cindy Sheehan that Casey re-enlisted because he felt he an obligation to help his comrades still in Iraq. A real hero.

Cindy wants to ask the President what ‘noble cause’ her son had to die for, not why her son died.

And that pussy Bush does not even have the balls to look her in the eye and sit down with her to answer her questions.

You know why??? Because he knows that he can not sell her the load of crap that he is peddling to the American people...he knows that she will see behind the curtain and expose the fraud that he is...that is why.

Aggie Hoopsfan

08-22-2005, 08:41 AM

And we now know from Cindy Sheehan that Casey re-enlisted because he felt he an obligation to help his comrades still in Iraq. A real hero.

Cindy wants to ask the President what ‘noble cause’ her son had to die for, not why her son died.

So, is going back to fight with his comrades not a noble cause?

And that pussy Bush does not even have the balls to look her in the eye and sit down with her to answer her questions.

You know why???

Yes, because every dumbfuck who opposes anything he does will go to Crawford and camp out until they get their five minutes of time with him.

The guy is running the free world, if he took time out of his day to meet with every one of us he wouldn't have time to run the country, or the civilized West.

Further, it's complete bullshit that she is expecting to meet with him, Bush already met with her once.

Tell you what, let's send Cindy and a few others go over to Afghanistan to talk with OBL about peace and no war. My bet is they won't go, because they don't hate war, they just hate GWB.

Hook Dem

08-22-2005, 08:44 AM

"Tell you what, let's send Cindy and a few others go over to Afghanistan to talk with OBL about peace and no war. My bet is they won't go, because they don't hate war, they just hate GWB."..............
Nah! Ya Think?

smeagol

08-22-2005, 08:45 AM

The guy is running the free world.
:rolleyes

Yeah, the only part of the World that's free is the US.

Or did you mean he runs the free World because he does pretty much what ever he wants, no matter what the rest of the "free World" really want to do?

Jimcs50

08-22-2005, 09:09 AM

So, is going back to fight with his comrades not a noble cause?

The guy is running the free world, if he took time out of his day to meet with every one of us he wouldn't have time to run the country, or the civilized West.

.

Oh yes, he must save the time so he can take a 2 hr bike stroll with Lance Armstrong. I am sure the two of them were discussing the world problems and came up with a lot of solutions. :rolleyes AHF, I thought you were smarter than this.

Aggie Hoopsfan

08-22-2005, 10:10 AM

The biggest proof that Bush has this all wrong is the fact that he won't talk to her. Look at the growing number of people protesting him and the war. All he had to do was be human at the very beginning and this would have never come to this problem dissolved.

1. He already met with her once.

2. This isn't about her son, it's political grandstanding.

3. If he met with her, all the whacko nut jobs would be lining up one after another demanding the same.

Oh yes, he must save the time so he can take a 2 hr bike stroll with Lance Armstrong. I am sure the two of them were discussing the world problems and came up with a lot of solutions.

Jim, they were meeting to talk about cancer research funding. The bike ride was just a different way of doing business, versus sitting across the table from one another.

JoeChalupa

08-22-2005, 10:31 AM

1. He already met with her once.

2. This isn't about her son, it's political grandstanding.

3. If he met with her, all the whacko nut jobs would be lining up one after another demanding the same.

Jim, they were meeting to talk about cancer research funding. The bike ride was just a different way of doing business, versus sitting across the table from one another.

I think the bike ride was a dangerous move for Bush.

Trainwreck2100

08-22-2005, 11:08 AM

I think the bike ride was a dangerous move for Bush.

Let's see, bike with Lance Armstrong or talk to some lady camping outside of your house. Which would you choose?

Aggie Hoopsfan

08-22-2005, 11:53 AM

1. He didn't meet with her he meet with a group of people in one of his babble do-gooder load of crap speeches.

He met, hugged, and prayed with her and her family. That's a hell of a lot more than 95% of the families of troops killed in Iraq got. Sorry, I come from a military family, and have no sympathy for her only getting to meet with him for a short time.

Again, I don't get the hate for the bike ride. Lance was there to meet with President Bush about increasing federal funding for cancer research. Bush likes to bike ride, Lance obviously does, so they chose to do so while talking cancer research.

How is this any different from say Reagan and Gorbachev going for a horseback ride on Ronald's ranch?

Oh yeah, because it's Bush and because some psycho bitch thinks she's entitled to something because her son CHOSE to go to Iraq (and I'm not trying to say people shouldn't feel compassion for her).

She wanted to know why we're over there, and Bush has given three speeches since then talking about Iraq and addressing her questions.

And deep down, I think if any of you who are calling out Bush are honest with yourselves, you already know that him meeting her won't solve a damn thing.

I mean the woman is grandstanding about dead troops when their families have asked her not to include their sons in her campaign, she's going off on wild rants about Palestine-Israel, and already distorted the whole shot gun incident last week (she said that they were being shot at - if a Texan was really shooting at you, you wouldn't be around to talk about it).

Why would the distortions and political rants end if Bush actually met with her? They wouldn't, and she'd twist and distort everything from what Bush said to how he scratched his nose in her presence.

I don't blame Bush one bit for not meeting with her, especially when she's got Michael Moore pulling her strings. The hell with that.

JohnnyMarzetti

08-22-2005, 12:13 PM

I think the bike ride was a dangerous move for Bush.

http://www.americanpolitics.com/MOPAUL20040526bushtrainingwheels.gif

Aggie Hoopsfan

08-22-2005, 01:02 PM

It's not an excuse. I'm tired of people like you whining that he should meet with her.

The best I can tell her whole beef is she wants to know why we're in Iraq. Bush has stated that about a billion times.

If she hasn't gotten the message by now, no amount of time with W. is going to change that.

Again, be honest with yourself, and you know damn well the only reason she wants to meet with him is propagandize the whole thing for the left.

Look at her statements since she got to Crawford. THere's nothing stable or rational about her comments.

JohnnyMarzetti

08-22-2005, 01:06 PM

Look at his statements since he got in the White House

THere's nothing stable or rational about his comments.

Stop kissing HIS ASS!!!

Dos

08-22-2005, 02:24 PM

ahh yes.. does the left really thinking we are fighting a army? We are fighting cowards that wear any uniform of military service, they hide among women and children, they could care less who they blow up in the process as long as allah is happy, thats the problem... I guess the left would have us round up all the iraqi's and screen them one by one for bombs or signs of insurgency... thing is it ain't going to happen... the same crowd that was clamoring for bush 41 to get the job done after the first gulf war is now the same crowd that is saying bring our troops home now... increasing troop strength now only adds more targets for the insurgency.. besides it's the generals on the ground making the decision about troop strength.. bring them home now and the whole region is destablizied.. like hillary, bill and kerry said we can't cut and run we have to finish the job...

JoeChalupa

08-22-2005, 02:28 PM

Uh, just so you know. It is not only the "left" that are questioning the war in Iraq.

Even some republicans are saying it.

August 22, 2005
Sen. Hagel Says Iraq Looking Like Vietnam
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Filed at 9:56 a.m. ET

WASHINGTON (AP) -- A leading Republican senator and prospective presidential candidate said Sunday that the war in Iraq has destabilized the Middle East and is looking more like the Vietnam conflict from a generation ago.

Nebraska Sen. Chuck Hagel, who received two Purple Hearts and other military honors for his service in Vietnam, reiterated his position that the United States needs to develop a strategy to leave Iraq. Hagel scoffed at the idea that U.S. troops could be in Iraq four years from now at levels above 100,000, a contingency for which the Pentagon is preparing.

''We should start figuring out how we get out of there,'' Hagel said on ''This Week'' on ABC. ''But with this understanding, we cannot leave a vacuum that further destabilizes the Middle East. I think our involvement there has destabilized the Middle East. And the longer we stay there, I think the further destabilization will occur.''

Hagel said ''stay the course'' is not a policy. ''By any standard, when you analyze 2 1/2 years in Iraq ... we're not winning,'' he said.

Clandestino

08-22-2005, 02:36 PM

fuck hagel... there is a strategy to get out of iraq. everyone would love for the iraqis to be able to take care of themselves, but they can't. just like the kosovars, we are still there. you guys need to stop forgetting that. in fact 1400 texas natl guardsmen men just left for a rotation.

JoeChalupa

08-22-2005, 02:41 PM

Just saying..it ain't only the left.

Oh...and fuck Zell Miller!! :lol

Aggie Hoopsfan

08-22-2005, 02:50 PM

I'm tired of people like you who think our President is so far above and beyond dealing with the general public.

We live in a representative democracy, hence we are not entitled to first-person access.

Bush needs to make himself more human and allow the public to see that as a human he does the best he can to lead us in these times. He hasn't done this.

You mean like telling the Secret Service to piss off when they didn't want him going to NYC after 9/11, when he stood in the rubble with the firefighters who had lost their friends, family, and buddies?

You mean like flying into Baghdad International Airport and having a Christmas day meal with the troops, knowing there was a fairly decent chance of AF1 being hit by a Stinger?

Yeah, brilliant insight, the guy should get out more.

Bush is by no means perfect, as a student of history and Islam I think he's either made some mistakes or gotten bad advice here and there, but just pulling out of Iraq isn't going to solve jack shit.

Clandestino brings up a good point, we're still in Kosovo (Clinton's "war") how many years later, no one's bitching about that.

And no, it's not changing the topic. It's called context, try using some.

Spurminator

08-22-2005, 03:22 PM

I sit somewhere between the two of you.

I do think Bush is very poor at communicating objectives and explaining the reasoning behind most of his actions. He prefers simple (vague) explanations about almost everything. This "Simple Man" approach appeals to a lot of people, but it turns off a great many as well. I would prefer someone who spoke in simple terms, but was better able to define his goals and answer tough questions. As much as his policies are debated, you very rarely see any of Bush's supporters quoting the man himself while arguing for one of his initiatives.

That said, I wouldn't go as far as to say he "should" meet with his detractors. If he did, that would be great... bonus points in my book... but that's all it is, just bonus. It goes above and beyond what he should be expected to do, though it's not out of the question to want it.

jochhejaam

08-22-2005, 05:25 PM

I stand corrected and good point. The question really is. Is it worth it to ignore this women or is more gained by sympathizing with here and dealing one on one? I feel more is gained than lost by letting go of 1 hour if his vacation.

How many moderate dems do you see out there voicing support for Cindy?
Even they're staying away from the anti-war/hate-Bush theme coming out of the Cindy camp.

Any meeting with Cindy is a meeting with the lunatic left and Bush has zero to gain by meeting with them. It's the "Michael Moore Show" Ryan and Bush ain't goin'!

j-6

08-22-2005, 05:54 PM

It's not an excuse. I'm tired of people like you whining that he should meet with her.

I guess the one thing I don't understand about this is why he's ducking her. She's right there! Just go send some blue suit out the front gate to grab her and have a conversation. Or pick her up in the limo on your way home from Salt Lake. Hell, I don't know.

I see the point that he already dealt with her once. But when there's a screaming baby in the room, you either give it attention until it hushes or sit through the screaming until it finally goes to sleep.

Regardless of the reasons of why he isn't doing meeting with her, Cindy is making the president look like either a coward or an an asshole. And that 36% approval rating could use all the help it can get (link (http://www.themoderatevoice.com/posts/1124730011.shtml))

I'm no Bush supporter, but it's sad that our president now has the 3rd lowest public approval rating in the last sixty years, ahead of Nixon's 24% and Carter's 34%. The GOP backers here can say that they don't give a shit what his rating is, and the Demo's can harp about that more people than ever can see some sort of truth. I just think it's sad (I can't find another word that fits) that basically 2 out of 3 people doesn't approve of the job he's doing, for whatever reasons.

jochhejaam

08-22-2005, 06:10 PM

I just think it's sad (I can't find another word that fits) that basically 2 out of 3 people doesn't approve of the job he's doing, for whatever reasons.

Did you intentionally misrepresent his approval rating or are you just not good with percentages? You would have been closer if you had rounded it out to 1 out of 2 also known as Half.

Monday, August 8, 2005; CNN Posted: 7:25 p.m. EDT (23:25 GMT)
President Bush's slumping approval ratings seemed directly tied to the war in Iraq.
President Bush's approval rating remains among the lowest of his presidency, with some Americans growing increasingly dissatisfied with the Iraq war, according to a new CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll released Monday.

Forty-five percent of those polled said they approve of Bush's handling of his job, compared with 51 percent who said they are dissatisfied.

j-6

08-22-2005, 06:21 PM

Did you intentionally misrepresent his approval rating or are you just not good with percentages? You would have been closer if you had rounded it out to 1 out of 2 also known as Half.

Monday, August 8, 2005; CNN Posted: 7:25 p.m. EDT (23:25 GMT)
President Bush's slumping approval ratings seemed directly tied to the war in Iraq.
President Bush's approval rating remains among the lowest of his presidency, with some Americans growing increasingly dissatisfied with the Iraq war, according to a new CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll released Monday.

Forty-five percent of those polled said they approve of Bush's handling of his job, compared with 51 percent who said they are dissatisfied.

There's a link right next to my statement. Here it is again so you don't have to look for it.

http://www.themoderatevoice.com/posts/1124730011.shtml

Aggie Hoopsfan

08-22-2005, 06:47 PM

I do think Bush is very poor at communicating objectives and explaining the reasoning behind most of his actions.

History will show that going into Iraq was a great move. Why? Because all the dumfuck Islamoterrorists are going there to take on our heavily armed military and getting their express ticket to their 72 virgins, instead of waiting for them to come across our borders and pick off unarmed civilians.

But of course Bush can't come out and say that, too many on the left wouldn't get it and you don't unzip your fly WRT your opponents when you're in a war for survival (and yes, history will also show this showdown between the West and militant Islam to be one of survival).

I guess the one thing I don't understand about this is why he's ducking her. She's right there! Just go send some blue suit out the front gate to grab her and have a conversation.

Because she's a left wing nut job, that's why. Like I said, Bush could talk to that stupid bitch for the rest of his and her lives, and she'd still be spewing the hate that she is today.

I mean, this woman called Bush the world's worst terrorist. Think about that. When you say shit like that, you forfeit your right to any legitimate civilized conversation with anyone, let alone the president of the United fucking States of America.

j-6

08-22-2005, 07:01 PM

Because she's a left wing nut job, that's why. Like I said, Bush could talk to that stupid bitch for the rest of his and her lives, and she'd still be spewing the hate that she is today.

I mean, this woman called Bush the world's worst terrorist. Think about that. When you say shit like that, you forfeit your right to any legitimate civilized conversation with anyone, let alone the president of the United fucking States of America.

Fair enough. Thanks for the answer. But keep in mind that Sheehan's approval rating is at the same 36% as the president, with a much lower disapproval rating (38% v. 58%, or 51% according to the post above quoted from CNN).

You might think she's a whack-job. That's fine, I'm watching this fight from the sidelines, and she does spout off a lot of crap like the tax thing and Bush being a terrorist. But a hell of a lot of people not named Bush are paying attention to her.

Just something to keep in mind.

Aggie Hoopsfan

08-22-2005, 07:07 PM

But a hell of a lot of people not named Bush are paying attention to her.

That's because there's no other pretty white girls missing on tropical islands, earthquakes in Cali, tsunamis in the Indian Ocean, bombings in London, etc.

The news is slow right now, hence she is somewhere besides the last 2 minutes of the broadcast.

Trainwreck2100

08-22-2005, 07:15 PM

That's because there's no other pretty white girls missing on tropical islands, earthquakes in Cali, tsunamis in the Indian Ocean, bombings in London, etc.

The news is slow right now, hence she is somewhere besides the last 2 minutes of the broadcast.

That pretty white girl is still missing, everyone just got bored because they know she's dead

whottt

08-22-2005, 11:42 PM

These are kids that enlisted in the service. Yeah it is volunteer, but had they known what kind of quagmire they were getting into, 50% of them would never have enlisted.

They fucking know they could get called into a war at any fucking time.

It is NOT volunteer to go to Iraq...Big difference there pal.

You put your name on the line the US Govt owns your ass and you VOLUNTEER to go whereever they tell you.

That's it....that's all there is too it...if you aren't willing to fight for this country and enforce the edicts of the US government...then don't join.

You STFU you stupid piece of crap, you fucking big man hiding behind a computer, sitting on your big fat white ass who is so easy to allow our young people go and die for NOTHING but big business.

Yeah? And if you want to go suck terrorist dick and support them killing US soldiers then get the fuck over there and fight those soldiers like a man rather than stabbing them in the back over here in the US.

Do you think the terrorists go "Oh shit, they're protesting the war in America, what ever will we do now?"

Fucking morons.

No...they say...hold on a little bit longer till the US govt caves to political pressure....then we can claim victory and get a few more people to follow us....

You go enlist and fight if you are so quick to allow others to do so.

No, you are a pussy a pussy who lets others fight for you.

You don't know shit about my situation.

"commie ass"?? What a total loser you are to use that term to describe people that have a brain and speak out against the wrongs in the world.

The Soviets were involved with Iran because they are on their Southern border, you freaking numnuts and they needed access to the Gulf...it made perfect sense, you freaking moron.

Yeah the Soviets weren't motivated by Oil at all...which is why they owned half of that fucking Oil company you talked about earlier....and occupied Iranian soil for 20 fucking years..

whottt

08-22-2005, 11:45 PM

"The GRU and KGB helped fund just about every antiwar movement and organization in America and abroad... What will be a great surprise to the American people is that GRU and KGB had a larger budget for antiwar propaganda in the United States than it did for economic and military support to the Vietnamese." - Russian defector Staanislov Lunev in 'Through the Eyes of the Enemy'(page 78).

The term "useful idiots" has been attributed to Lenin, as a description of those mindless people in the Western democracies who would always find ways to excuse whatever the Soviet Union did.

Quote Usama Bin Laden:

I ask the American people to force their government to give up anti-Muslim policies. The American people had risen against their government's war in Vietnam. They must do the same today.

Go libs go....

Aggie Hoopsfan

08-22-2005, 11:49 PM

Damn some people need to go take some world history classes.

The last war the US lost was Vietnam. The last war that Osama's crew won was against Russia in Afghanistan.

What did both wars have in common? "Bleed them until public sentiment brings them back home."

Osama's running the same playbook today, and it looks like quite a few are falling for the same sucker play.

Aggie Hoopsfan

08-23-2005, 09:51 AM

With that being true. It still doesn't take away from the fact that if he would have talked to her she would have been well on her way out of there.

For the 84,293rd time, talking her would have solved nothing and would have given her more political capital.

He could have said "I'm sorry" 1000 times to her, and she would have just sauntered out and said "he said he was sorry, but I could tell he didn't mean it", and then the media would be creaming themselves all over it.

Jelly

08-23-2005, 10:29 AM

For the 84,293rd time, talking her would have solved nothing and would have given her more political capital.

He could have said "I'm sorry" 1000 times to her, and she would have just sauntered out and said "he said he was sorry, but I could tell he didn't mean it", and then the media would be creaming themselves all over it.

No. She would have come out and said "he acted like it was a pep rally. He was so upbeat and didn't even know Casey's name. He wouldn't even look at his picture". Other families that were at that first meeting with Bush have said this was a total mischaractization of the presidents demeanor.

She actually already asked the "Why did my son die" question and he said "because I believe everyone deserves to live in freedom". So she got an answer, she just doesn't like it or agree with it.
Still, it would have been wise for the president to have defused this situation earlier and met with her. Then what could she complain about, that the President of the United States only met with her twice?

sbsquared

08-23-2005, 12:40 PM

I can't remember who was interviewing Cindy, but I heard the clip on the Laura Ingraham show last week - anyway, the man said to Cindy "if the President comes out and talks to you now, it would kind of stop all this momentum." Cindy replied, "yes, it would really stop all this momentum we've got going, so I hope he doesn't come out and talk to me." She also said that she hoped that the Bush Administration hadn't thought of that.

So, does she really want to talk to the President? Or does she just want to extend her 15 minutes of fame and continue spewing her hatred?

whottt

08-23-2005, 12:57 PM

Um...the President of the Unites States of America is not an errand boy.

She doesn't dictate anything to the Pres...no matter how much the radical left that is using her may want it...

It's not working by the way...this isn't the 60's anymore and the anti-war movement isn't convincing anyone of anything but themselves....incestous propaganda does not a growing movement make.

Clandestino

08-23-2005, 01:44 PM

Nbadan

08-24-2005, 01:43 PM

Apparently, its only BAD for liberals and Cindy Sheehan to 'allegedly' use the troops to push a purely political agenda...

Speaking in Idaho a few minutes ago, Bush argued that moms like Cindy Sheehan are a threat to freedom:

There are few things more difficult in life than seeing a loved one go off to war, and here in Idaho, a mom named Tammy Pruitt…knows that feeling six times over.

Tammy has four sons serving in Iraq right now with the Idaho National Guard — Eric, Evan, Greg, and Jeff. Last year, her husband Leon and another son Aaron returned from Iraq where they helped train Iraqi firefighters in Mosul.

Tammy says this — and I want you to hear this — “I know that if something happens to one of the boys, they would leave this world doing what they believe, what they think is right for our country. And I guess you couldn’t ask for a better way of life than giving it for something you believe in.”

America lives in freedom because of families like the Pruitts.

Think Progress (http://thinkprogress.org/2005/08/24/latest-sheehan-attack)

mookie2001

08-24-2005, 01:50 PM

Oh STFU with that stupid ass "aiding and abetting" crap you neocons love to spew. It is every American's right to speak out and nowhere in the constitution does it say any American has to blindly be behind Dubya.

Get your head out of his ass and see the real world.

And the right is only "American" when they have a republican in office.
You were very un-American during the Clinton years just like 99.9% of conservatives are.

^OWNED
i remember those times
Rush Limbaugh was the most unamerican bastard alive

whottt

08-24-2005, 03:20 PM

Commies can't own anything.

Nbadan

08-25-2005, 02:53 AM

From this point forward the W administration shall hence forth be known as the shill administration. So far we've had shill reporters - Gannon/Yonivore and Novak, and shill cabinet members - almost every cabinet member, but especially the hispanic ones, and now the Republican Party bring you a new shill to gawk at and wonder, why? Shill protestors.

Republican Shills

Move America Forward ( the Hate crowd ) was outed today by Keith Olbermann as having been launched by a Sacramento P.R. firm which has strong ties to the Republican party. Later in the segment Dana Milbank said that they were part of the Orin Hatch for President campaign. lol That's grassroots for you. This diary at Kos was the first one that I found which uncovered the scam.

The Swift boating of Cindy is led by Sal Russo and Mr. Puke himself Mark Williams. These people are bottom feeding scum suckers of the lowest kind. Their Creepy Caravan is nothing more than Republican operatives trying to combat a powerful message by Sheehan in the only way they know how to respond. S-M-E-A-R. Here's much more information about MAF's antics from the Center for Media and Democracy.

Crooks and Liars (http://www.crooksandliars.com/2005/08/24.html#a4616)

Nbadan

08-25-2005, 03:50 AM

Sheehan returns to Crawford:

Sheehan returns to Crawford
Dead soldier's mom resumes anti-war vigil before Bush returns

CRAWFORD, Texas (CNN) -- The California woman at the center of anti-war protests outside President Bush's ranch returned to Texas to cheers -- and a few boos -- Wednesday after nearly a week away to tend her ailing mother.

About 40 supporters, and a couple of Bush supporters, greeted Sheehan's return to "Camp Casey," outside Bush's property. The protest site, made up of two campsites, is named after her 24-year-old son, an Army mechanic killed in Baghdad last year.

While she was away, Sheehan's supporters erected a 10-by-10-foot banner with the dates of her son's birth and death and the words: "In loving memory of Army Specialist Casey A. Sheehan."

Sheehan broke down in tears upon seeing it, prompting first aid treatment by medical personnel.

The campsites are lined with crosses bearing the names of American troops killed in Iraq, and Sheehan laid flowers and kissed the markers bearing her son's name.

http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2005/POLITICS/08/24/crawford.protest/story.faints.ap.jpg
Returning to Camp Casey, Sheehan receives help after feeling faint upon seeing a banner for her son.

Nbadan

08-25-2005, 03:57 AM

Apparently, the anti-Sheehan group in Crawford supports their cause the way young, conservative, chicken-hawks support the Army...

http://www.nationalreview.com/images/probush2.JPG

http://www.nationalreview.com/images/probush3.JPG

http://empress.buzzstuff.net/archives/tumbleweed.jpg

whottt

08-25-2005, 04:26 AM

They have jobs...

Aggie Hoopsfan

08-25-2005, 08:11 AM

Sheehan broke down in tears upon seeing it, prompting first aid treatment by medical personnel.

A little bit overly dramatic...

Man I'm tired of this shit. She wants US troops completely out of the Mideast. That won't solve a damn thing, just clear the way for AQ to grow and set up a caliphate.

Wasn't she paying attention during the Cold War?

mookie2001

08-25-2005, 02:08 PM

http://www.nationalreview.com/images/probush3.JPG

ROFLROFL

Jelly

08-25-2005, 02:28 PM

I'm sorry. But every picture I see of Cindy Sheehan looks so staged, overwrought and corny....like bad Shakespeare in the park.

Nbadan

08-27-2005, 03:55 AM

Whatever you think of Cindy Sheehan it is incredible that W won't just meet with her and be honest and tell her that Iraq was elective war.

W's problem may soon turn into Tom Delay's problem

Iraq war protestor says to shift focus to Congress

CRAWFORD, Texas, Aug 26 (Reuters) - Iraq war protester Cindy Sheehan, whose vigil near President George W. Bush's Texas ranch has become a symbol for the anti-war movement, said on Friday she plans to focus on Congress, starting with Bush close ally and fellow Texan House Majority Leader Tom DeLay.

Sheehan has been demanding a meeting with Bush to discuss the U.S. presence in Iraq, where her son was killed in 2004, and next Thursday plans to begin a bus tour from Bush's ranch to the White House to campaign for withdrawal of U.S. troops.

One of DeLay's Texas district offices would likely be the first stop, she said. That would be about a 5.5 hour drive from Bush's ranch in Crawford, where he is on a month-long vacation.

"I think our first stop might be Tom DeLay's office," she said, surrounded by supporters. "I just wanted to let him know so he'll be in his office when we get there."
"The president is not going to meet with us, probably," Sheehan said. "We the people need to influence our congressional representatives and I hear he's pretty close by," referring to DeLay.

Alertnet (http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N2667695.htm)

Clandestino

08-27-2005, 07:48 AM

stupid cunt. she's just a puppet. i guess if it pays her bills. there is no way in hell her son would approve of this bullshit.

jochhejaam

08-27-2005, 08:39 AM

Whatever you think of Cindy Sheehan it is incredible that W won't just meet with her and be honest and tell her that Iraq was elective war.

W's problem may soon turn into Tom Delay's problem
Alertnet (http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N2667695.htm)

What's incredible is that everyone knows Sindy's a prop for the lunatic-left and Michael Moore and you still have people such as yourself that think it's "incredible" that he won't meet with her.

And now enter the Sharpton camp, guess he hasn't been gettin' much press lately.
Michael, Sindy and Sharpton, choose your poison, eh?

Nbadan

08-27-2005, 03:42 PM

What are right-wing pundits to do when nobody buys their lies anymore?

http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/images/buses2/images/IMGP1593_JPG.jpg

Attacking Cindy Sheehan was the worst mistake this administration could have made...

http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/images/buses2/images/IMGP1598_JPG.jpg

Just because Michael Moore posts Cindy's letters on his site, all of the sudden a mother who only wants answers to why her son had to die, is 'in bed' with MM? I suppose since Reuters News Service posts the same letters then Reuters is also in bed with Sheehan and MM?

http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/images/buses2/images/IMGP1606_JPG.jpg

Cindy Sheehan did not go looking for organizations like Moveon.org, but her pure message attracted these organizations

http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/images/buses2/images/IMGP1612_JPG.jpg

The loss of her son gives her absolute moral authority to keep asking why this war was neccessary

http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/images/buses2/images/IMGP1621_JPG.jpg

W had a chance to stop this, but he didn't and now folks, we have a circus.

JoeChalupa

08-27-2005, 03:46 PM

Bush knows how to use props as well.

Trainwreck2100

08-27-2005, 04:01 PM

Cindy Sheehan did not go looking for organizations like Moveon.org, but her pure message attracted these organizations

I'd say it's more of the anti-bush thing that attracted these organizations and not the message.

hussker

08-27-2005, 04:59 PM

1) Son signed up voluntarily, as an adult...was not conscripted
2) Agreed to obey orders of those appointed over him
3) Agreed to support and defend the Constitution of the US against all enemies, foreign and domestic
4) Swore to bear true faith and allegience to the same
5) Agreed to follow the orders of the President of the United States
6) Did this of his own free will
7) Without mental reservation or purpose of evasion
and Swore that to God (That certainly has to irritate some of you)

The man did what the man felt he should do and he died doing it. That is unfortunate, but people do it for corporations on a daily basis...either getting to the job, working at the job, or coming home from the job.

Cindy, pull up your stakes and praise your son...This does not glorify him.

Jelly

08-27-2005, 05:34 PM

"The loss of her son gives her absolute moral authority to keep asking why this war was neccessary"

I am so sick of this "absolute moral authority" bullshit. She has no more moral authority than the 3,700 other parents of fallen soldiers (and if you took a poll among that group you would find her to be in the minority). And I seriously question the morality of a woman who advocates - no INSISTS- that we pull out of Iraq immediately, a move that would lead to the slaughter of the millions of Iraqis who dared try to make their country a better place by 'collaborating' with Americans. This woman has no moral authority. She is morally repugnant and the more she opens her mouth the more peoples feelings toward her will change as mine did... from sympathy to disgust.

btw- She's no f*cking genius. She's hardly the only one in America asking if the war was necessary. Get a clue. People from all sides have been asking this question for a long time and most have concluded that it probably wasn't. But the fact is, the war happened and we are there. The question to be asking is where do we go from here. The answer is not cut and run. Most people who were against this war will at least acknowledge our responsibilities to Iraq.... most people except that bitch in Crawford.

JohnnyMarzetti

08-27-2005, 05:38 PM

hussker

08-27-2005, 05:46 PM

We all have authority to ask the question. The answer is not so pleasant. Follow the trail, if you choose to look for it. If you do not look for it, you will never find it. Most of the time the right decision is not the popular decision. It takes guts to make that decision. History, not present day, will determine if the decisions made by the administration were/are right or wrong. We should support them for what they are. If we do not like the decisions, then perhaps we should pull up our proverbial stakes and leave. You will not find the same sweet life in other countries (Japan, Korea,China, Canada, England, Afghanistan, Mexico, Iraq to name a few I have been to) that you find here.

JoeChalupa

08-27-2005, 05:49 PM

Once again the proverbial..."If you don't like it....leave"...comes around.

America is the land of the Free and that does not pertain only to those who believe in Bush. I'll be damned if I'm leaving just because I don't agree with some of the actions of this administration.

Jelly

08-27-2005, 05:52 PM

I certainly wouldn't like to live in North Korea, Mexico, or Afghanistan, but I know you can find just as good a life in Canada and England as you can find here.

hussker

08-27-2005, 06:08 PM

I certainly wouldn't like to live in North Korea, Mexico, or Afghanistan, but I know you can find just as good a life in Canada and England as you can find here.

Go live there for 5 years and please report back to us how much you enjoyed their way of life. I challenge you.

hussker

08-27-2005, 06:08 PM

Jelly

08-27-2005, 06:16 PM

Go live there for 5 years and please report back to us how much you enjoyed their way of life. I challenge you.

no, I'm not going to do that just to satisfy an internet debate :lol
I have lived in other countries...Britain, Panama, and Germany. (the latter I lived in for 9 years). You can have a great life in any one of them. (not so much in Panama since the canal was handed over)

hussker

08-27-2005, 06:25 PM

hussker

08-27-2005, 06:29 PM

...and, I do not agree with every aspect or facet of this war. I am certainly not (and neither are MOST of us) in a position to know all of the intelligence going on. Those things will all come out in the end and history can decide. I do not disagree with Ms Sheehan's right to do what she is doing. She certainly has that right. I question not her motives. What I question is judgment. That is all.

Jelly

08-27-2005, 06:30 PM

No satisfaction of an Internet debate. There is no debate. How many people are beating down the borders to get into some of those other countries? It is easy to say that life in another country is just as good when we know that we are only temporary residents and we get to come back. That is my only point. We are fortunate to have choices that other countries' residents do not have.

hussker,
surely you realize that there are also tons of people beating down the doors trying to get into Britain and Canada? It's obnoxious and uninformed to think that the U.S. is the only desirable place to live...or even that it is considered by the world as the "most" desirable place to live. It isn't. It's among a group of similarly desirable places to live.

p.s. my mother is British and it took her 20 years to like living in America and she still prefers Britain....to the point where they have decided that when he retires this year they will move back there for good. She can't wait. America is not everyone's dreamland, Husker.

hussker

08-27-2005, 06:33 PM

Ok, show me the data. That is opinion you are spouting.

Jelly

08-27-2005, 07:45 PM

Ok, show me the data. That is opinion you are spouting.

uh..yeah, just as you have to this point only spouted your opinion. I'm sorry, but can you show me where your data is? Here's a fun little exercise, boys and girls, find the data in the following..

"No satisfaction of an Internet debate. There is no debate. How many people are beating down the borders to get into some of those other countries? It is easy to say that life in another country is just as good when we know that we are only temporary residents and we get to come back. That is my only point. We are fortunate to have choices that other countries' residents do not have."

You don't know much about many other countries if you think we are the only ones with boat loads of immigrants wanting in. I'm not going to invest a lot of time researching world migration stats, (especially since you have thus far provided zero real data) but I'll plug in some quick numbers I got off of the CIA world factbook website.

Net Migration
U.S - 3.31 per 1,000 (pop)
Canada - 5.9
Australia - 3.91
U.K.- 3.91

Also, google Pew Global Attitudes. This is a recent poll which measured attitudes in 16 different countries. One of the questions asked respondents where they would most like to immigrate. I think the U.S. came in 4th or 5th. After Australia, Canada, and Britain.

I love my country, but I am not so narrow-minded as to think it is the only great place to live and that everyone in the world wants to come here.

jochhejaam

08-27-2005, 08:01 PM

Originally posted by nbadan : Just because Michael Moore posts Cindy's letters on his site, all of the sudden a mother who only wants answers to why her son had to die, is 'in bed' with MM? I suppose since Reuters News Service posts the same letters then Reuters is also in bed with Sheehan and MM?

There's a big difference in those that make and those that report the news Dan. Like Moore is politically neutral.

hussker

08-27-2005, 08:25 PM

uh..yeah, just as you have to this point only spouted your opinion. I'm sorry, but can you show me where your data is? Here's a fun little exercise, boys and girls, find the data in the following..

"No satisfaction of an Internet debate. There is no debate. How many people are beating down the borders to get into some of those other countries? It is easy to say that life in another country is just as good when we know that we are only temporary residents and we get to come back. That is my only point. We are fortunate to have choices that other countries' residents do not have."

You don't know much about many other countries if you think we are the only ones with boat loads of immigrants wanting in. I'm not going to invest a lot of time researching world migration stats, (especially since you have thus far provided zero real data) but I'll plug in some quick numbers I got off of the CIA world factbook website.

Net Migration
U.S - 3.31 per 1,000 (pop)
Canada - 5.9
Australia - 3.91
U.K.- 3.91

Also, google Pew Global Attitudes. This is a recent poll which measured attitudes in 16 different countries. One of the questions asked respondents where they would most like to immigrate. I think the U.S. came in 4th or 5th. After Australia, Canada, and Britain.

I love my country, but I am not so narrow-minded as to think it is the only great place to live and that everyone in the world wants to come here.

Those are for "LEGAL" immigrants and those wanting asylum. Bet you cannot get a true number for those illegally getting in and wanting asylum! My point is this...America is still the land of opportunity. It is still the land of freedom. It is still the land of "NO CEILINGS FOR SUCCESS IF YOU ARE DRIVEN". Point of order here. My wife is Japanese, still a Japanese Citizen and proud of her heritage. She is educated beyond what the majority of Americans are and most Japanese WOMEN. She is the only PERSON in her family who 1) Speaks English 2) Lives in the US 3) Has a PhD.
You know why she wants to stay here but retain her Japanese citizenship? Simple: The United States and Japan make up roughly 13% of the World's Population, yet together, have 88% of the WORLD's WEALTH. That wealth is defined well beyond the spectrum of GNP. It deals with GNP and what is in the distribution lines for consumption of goods. She is proud (very proud) to be Japanese. She is fortunate to have th opportunity to come to a country where she can maximize her potential.
In Japan, the Woman has a ceiling for success, regardless of credentials/schooling, etc...
In the United States, that ceiling is unlimited. It is, however, at a cost. What is the cost? Taxes. Legislation. Protection. Legal course for living here if not a citizen. More taxes.

The value gained? FREEDOM. The same FREEDOM that Casey Sheehan enlisted in the USMC for to protect for you, your family, and those who beat down the doors to come here. The same freedom he signed up to protect that allows us to think, speak and act the way we do with protection. The same freedom that most who are on Ms Sheehan's bandwagon have never fought for. The same freedom that gives you the right to either love or loathe the Executive/Legislative/Judicial branches we have here in the United States.

Do other countries have that same freedom? I would say NO. I have been there to those countries. I have seen the results of what some of our "allies" do in the face of protest. We are fortunate to have that right to protest and support as we see fit. People fight and die for that. Not just those who are from here...but those who strive, whether legally or illegally, to get here. Check those numbers dear. That is reality...not something out of a database. Of course, our borders are easier to get into, so I will give you that, but there are many who want to, and do succeed at getting in. Much higher than your sterile numbers.

As far as POLLS go...never trust them. If we did, then Bush would have never been president, let alone a two-termer.

Hugz,
hussker

hussker

08-27-2005, 08:33 PM

And oh, by the way, Global attitudes are SUBJECTIVE. No objectivity in that whatsoever. Non-data.

hussker

08-27-2005, 08:35 PM

and finally, as I said before, you have choices as an American. Take that statement for what it is worth. I am now going back to the Cowboys-Texans game...something unavailable in many of the aforementioned countries...

hussker

08-27-2005, 08:37 PM

except on AFN, provided by your tax dollars

hussker

08-27-2005, 08:38 PM

for YOUR troops fighting so you can have the freedom of this web board

hussker

08-27-2005, 08:38 PM

God Bless the USA

hussker

08-27-2005, 08:39 PM

And the best 5$ ticket in sports...a Friday Night Texas HS Football Game

hussker

08-27-2005, 08:40 PM

AFN = American Forces Network

hussker

08-27-2005, 08:42 PM

Jelly

08-27-2005, 08:43 PM

Those are for "LEGAL" immigrants and those wanting asylum. Bet you cannot get a true number for those illegally getting in and wanting asylum!

As far as POLLS go...never trust them. If we did, then Bush would have never been president, let alone a two-termer.

Hugz,
hussker

Bet you I can! (at least some of those numbers) You can find this in the OECD report (and on the BBC website)

top nations for asylum seekers

1. France (14,049 per year)
2. U.S.A. (9,660)
3. Germany (8,519)
4. Austria (6,621)
5. Canada (5,414)
6. Sweden (5,160)

Germany was ahead of the United States for 18 years (it wasthe #1 nation for that time. We were 3rd, behind France), and only fell behind in 2003.

As far as polls go, they are by far the best measure of public opinion, especially when done scientifically, extensively, across a broad spectrum, and by a reputable organization like Pew. I believe 55,000 people participated in the poll I mentioned.

kisses,
Jelly

btw-
"Bet you cannot get a true number for those illegally getting in and wanting asylum! "

why are you asking me to do all the work?

hussker

08-27-2005, 08:46 PM

55,000....so many when you consider the Earth's population. Heck, that is less than College Station population when the Students are gone for the summer! Validity and Reliability are crucial in data compilation. Did you check the CI of your data sources?

hussker

08-27-2005, 08:47 PM

The point is, there is no work to do. The only work is deciding if you are on board and supportive of the country you live in or if you are not...Your choice...we have choices and freedom of choice as AMERICANS

hussker

08-27-2005, 08:49 PM

I see two others looking on but not posting! Come on, join in! COWBOYS 7 TEXANS 0

boutons

08-27-2005, 08:50 PM

LOL... Boutons calls out "shrub loving repugs" whose kids aren't enlisting, and then when he finds one who is, it's Nature weeding out stupid people.

I bet you wouldn't send that same sentiment to an actual soldier's family, would you, you fucking coward?

Do the anti-war crowd a favor and keep your opinions to yourself.

I'm referring to the "brave" father, not his dead son, who says he will go fight when he knows he can't go.

Jelly

08-27-2005, 08:57 PM

for YOUR troops fighting so you can have the freedom of this web board

hussker,
my father was a career soldier... 35 freakin' years and served two tours in Vietnam. I also have a sister who may end up in Iraq before the years out. Do not dare attempt to lecture me on showing appreciation for our troops.

Jelly

08-27-2005, 09:12 PM

Clandestino

08-27-2005, 10:05 PM

when i left europe in 02, afn had 3 channels! actually 4, but it was one of the previous 3 but 12 hrs different! i remember how excited everyone was when it went from 1 channel to 3! hahaha

Jelly

08-27-2005, 10:09 PM

And oh, by the way, Global attitudes are SUBJECTIVE. No objectivity in that whatsoever. Non-data.

No kidding?? Opinion surveys are subjective? Who'd of thunk it?

Jelly

08-27-2005, 10:12 PM

when i left europe in 02, afn had 3 channels! actually 4, but it was one of the previous 3 but 12 hrs different! i remember how excited everyone was when it went from 1 channel to 3! hahaha

well, you were lucky. AFN for us meant all of one channel and back in the day, it didn't even come on until like noon or something. And the biggest hit show was General Hospital which came on at 4pm and was 6 months behind the storyline in the states. Still, everyone was addicted to it. :lol

Clandestino

08-27-2005, 10:53 PM

yeah, it was one for several years, then it turned into the 3... dancing in the streets!

Nbadan

08-28-2005, 03:13 AM

Saw it everyday when I was in Afghanistan fighting for the right for you to post on this. You can thank me anytime...by going to you recruiter and enlisting/getting a commission in the armed services so you can fight for something besides a mealy mouthed bunch of hypocrites...

Hus, first of all, welcome to the board and back to the US. However, your not the first Vet, nor the only Vet to post on this board. So don't expect any special treatment based solely on your previous military status. Those who you should be petitioning to go enlist are the 51% of Americans who voted for W on Nov 2nd 2004. Why should others, who other-wise want to proudly serve their nation, have to fight a war which they don't believe is justified?

On the one hand, your wanting us to thank you for fighting for our right to post our opinions in this forum, and in the other you want to take away that right from Cindy Sheehan. So which is it gonna be?

Nbadan

08-28-2005, 04:20 AM

http://workingforchange.speedera.net/www.workingforchange.com/webgraphics/wfc/TMW08-24-05.jpg

Nbadan

08-28-2005, 04:36 AM

Listeners of the Glenn Beck show can be proud of the complete lack of respect that they showed Cindy Sheehan and other grieving war-moms in Crawford

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v189/plastic_turkeys/crawford012.jpg

Nbadan

08-28-2005, 05:10 AM

http://img.coxnewsweb.com/C/01/21/01/image_1801211.gif

http://www.theillustrateddailyscribble.com/daily.scribble.jpgs.05/08.26.05.sheehan.pruett.jpg

Dos

08-28-2005, 03:47 PM

looks like everyone was melting in those pictures... thank God for Texas heat waves..

Trainwreck2100

08-28-2005, 10:41 PM

Dear Cindy,

After today nobody will care about your shit

Sincerely,
Lake New Orleans

Nbadan

08-29-2005, 03:54 AM

The Peaceful Occupation of Crawford:

A photographer friend of mine went down to Crawford to the Pro-War, Anti-Peace rally today. There were about 1500 people there he said. He also said that it was the most "third reich" spectacle that he had ever seen in America.

My friend said that the speakers were whipping up the crowd into a frenzy of hatred for me (like they already didn't hate me?) and for the peace movement. My friend said that the entire theme of the rally was: "Cindy is killing American troops by her anti-American protest." Oh really, isn't George Bush killing innocent Americans and Iraqis by sending them to fight in an illegal and immoral war for power and greed? I think the real culprit is my neighbor: George.

I am really sad that there are still people in America who think that someone exercising her freedom of speech is anti-American. People who say we DON'T have the right to dissent are un-patriotic and un-American. My friend said that the rally was really the scariest thing he had ever seen. Except for one funny part when some people were walking through the crowd with a "Say No to War---except when a Democrat is President" (whatever that means???) sign. I guess the people at the rally only read the "Say No to War" part and they were ripping up the signs and chasing the gentlemen out. The unfortunate sign holders were trying to tell the counter-protesters that they were on Bush's killing side, but the crowd wouldn't hear them.

Our rally had about 2500 people jammed into the Camp Casey II tent. The speakers and music were awesome. Joan sang a few more songs. I told the crowd that I totally understand George Bush's noble cause for continuing the war: I have to kill more Americans because I have already killed so many. Then I posed the question to them that we will pose to Congress and the small minority of Americans (38-40%) who still believe in George's oil war. How many more lives are you willing to sacrifice before you bring the troops home? I led the crowd in a deafening chant of "Not One More," aimed at George's vacation home.

I kind of feel sorry for George; holed up in his ranch. Not being able to go out unless he flies over in his helicopter. If he drove out of the ranch, he would have to see people who disagree with him. But every time he leaves the ranch now, he faces people demanding answers to the question: What Noble Cause?

George is going golfing in Arizona on Monday, then to San Diego on Monday afternoon and Tuesday. Be sure we will have people in those locations bird dogging him. He deserves to be made uncomfortable: he is making the entire world more than uncomfortable.

We are relaxing a little bit tonight after the rally. A very nice young man who was wounded and put in a wheel chair by Bush's war on the same day Casey was killed came out tonight. He is spending his honeymoon with his new bride here at Camp Casey. Which reminds me...we are having 2 weddings here tomorrow: One at Camp Casey I and one at Camp Casey II. We have had so many children and babies come out too...it is the cycle of life.

I was visited by a 2nd Lt. from Casey's 2-5 Cavalry that told me to keep up the good work and Casey's old roommate came out from Ft. Hood to meet me. He may have to go back to Iraq soon. He hopes he doesn't have to since he will be out in 6 months, but he is pretty sure he will be stop-lossed.

It was so hot today in Crawford. So hot, it seemed like there wasn't enough air to breathe. Then a storm came and gave us some blessed relief.

Update: Some pro-war people came up to Camp Casey II around 10pm and Ann Wright had to call the sheriff because they were getting a little rowdy.

Truthout,Cindy Sheehan (http://www.truthout.org/cindy.shtml)

jochhejaam

08-29-2005, 06:15 AM

Here you go Dan. Directly from your mentor Michael Moore's website.

What you can do to help

Support Cindy by making a contribution.
Your financial support is needed to make sure that Cindy and other military families and veterans can continue their vigil outside the Presidents, ranch. Please contribute to help cover the costs of assisting others with their travel and their stay in Crawford.

Donate Today

I'm sure if you haven't already, you'll want to send them a healthy donation.

http://www.meetwithcindy.org/

Spurminator

08-29-2005, 08:51 AM

This was pretty funny...

At the pro-Bush rally, there were some heated moments when two members of Protest Warrior, a group that frequently holds counter protests to anti-war rallies, walked in with a sign that read "Say No to War — Unless a Democrat is President."

Many Bush supporters only saw the top of the sign and believed the men were war protesters, so they began shouting and chasing the pair out. One man tore up their signs. When Will Marean of Minneapolis kept repeating that he was on the Bush side and tried to explain Protest Warrior's mission, one Bush supporter shook his hand and apologized.

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/front/3327786

mookie2001

08-29-2005, 10:54 AM

war keeps bush in office and keeps his supporters from openly calling him a moron, even though i think even they know deep-down inside that he couldn't pass the TAKS test with an NSA briefing and a cheatsheet
I like the cut of your jib

Clandestino

08-29-2005, 11:28 AM

give me a fucking break. you can't be retarded or buy the presidency. otherwise, elpimpo and mookie would be prez and vice prez...and ross perot would have been prex before them..