PDA

View Full Version : Sheehan Arrested at Whitehouse



Jeana (DP)
09-26-2005, 02:45 PM
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Cindy Sheehan, the California woman who has used her son's death in Iraq to spur the anti-war movement, was arrested Monday while protesting outside the White House.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/09/26/wardemonstrations.ap/index.html

It was only a matter of time . . .

Jules
09-26-2005, 02:56 PM
I figured sooner or later this would happen. While I do feel sorry she lost her son, I'm surpised she was able to camp outside Bush's residence here in Texas as long as she did. I think he was more than patient with her in that respect.

tybee204
09-26-2005, 03:49 PM
WOW maybe I should dig out my old make love not war t-shirts. I havent been arrested for Civil Disobedience in about 30 years. If they attempt to re-institute the Draft I will be right there with them.

Jeana (DP)
09-26-2005, 03:56 PM
WOW maybe I should dig out my old make love not war t-shirts. I havent been arrested for Civil Disobedience in about 30 years. If they attempt to re-institute the Draft I will be right there with them.


Just make sure someone is there taking pictures!!!! ;) ;)

BillyGoatGruff
09-26-2005, 05:18 PM
I figured sooner or later this would happen. While I do feel sorry she lost her son, I'm surpised she was able to camp outside Bush's residence here in Texas as long as she did. I think he was more than patient with her in that respect.
My sentiments as well. It's a shame her son died. But her protest seems to ignore the fact that it's a VOLUNTEER Army. Her son chose to be a soldier. "And you knew the job was dangerous when you took it, Fred." By throwing this huge a fit over it, its as if she's trying to infantilize her son, who was a grown man, who knew the dangers inherent in the occupation he chose for himelf. In many ways, I feel she is dissing her son's memory. I would be more interested in hearing what her husband--who has since filed for divorce from her--has to say about his wife and her relationship to their son and/or dealing with reality.

JBean
09-26-2005, 05:27 PM
My sentiments as well. It's a shame her son died. But her protest seems to ignore the fact that it's a VOLUNTEER Army. Her son chose to be a soldier. "And you knew the job was dangerous when you took it, Fred." By throwing this huge a fit over it, its as if she's trying to infantilize her son, who was a grown man, who knew the dangers inherent in the occupation he chose for himelf. In many ways, I feel she is dissing her son's memory. I would be more interested in hearing what her husband--who has since filed for divorce from her--has to say about his wife and her relationship to their son and/or dealing with reality.I agree 100%. I am sure her son would be mortified if he knew what she was doing to his legacy. Thanks for writing this so I didn't have to.:)

Marthatex
09-26-2005, 05:38 PM
At first I sympathized with Cindy Sheehan, but I think she should have stuck with the grieving mother statement and criticism of the reason and "handling" of the war. She really got out of line with some of her other statements regarding Israel and other things. I doubt she is an expert on foreign affairs; stick to one thing lady.

But it doesn't do much good to protest the war right now because we can't really just leave right now, at least that's what most people think. I'm not happy about the war and wish it would end, but I think Cindy lost her credibility.

Jeana (DP)
09-26-2005, 05:41 PM
At first I sympathized with Cindy Sheehan, but I think she should have stuck with the grieving mother statement and criticism of the reason and "handling" of the war. She really got out of line with some of her other statements regarding Israel and other things. I doubt she is an expert on foreign affairs; stick to one thing lady.

But it doesn't do much good to protest the war right now because we can't really just leave right now, at least that's what most people think. I'm not happy about the war and wish it would end, but I think Cindy lost her credibility.


I agree with you. She's been approached by some real wingnuts and either she doesn't care or doesn't realize they're making her look like a fruitloop. She's done her original argument harm by being associated with them. However, since her son and so many other sons and daughters have served, she's got that right.

nanandjim
09-26-2005, 05:52 PM
...In many ways, I feel she is dissing her son's memory...
I agree with your post.

IdahoMom
09-26-2005, 05:55 PM
Cindy is being used by a propaganda machine. I am sorry for the loss of her son, and I am grateful for his service.

If she was disorderly, she should have been arrested.

BillyGoatGruff
09-26-2005, 06:00 PM
I agree with you. She's been approached by some real wingnuts and either she doesn't care or doesn't realize they're making her look like a fruitloop. She's done her original argument harm by being associated with them. However, since her son and so many other sons and daughters have served, she's got that right.

Well, I think we may be seeing what was the reality all along. The woman is and has always been emotionally/mentally ill. As I said: it's a volunteer army. No one held a gun to her son's head to join. In fact, I'm now suspecting he may have joined to establish himself as an adult/man and get away from his mom. I would be interested in hearing what her ex-husband has to say about all this.

Jeana (DP)
09-26-2005, 06:02 PM
Well, I think we may be seeing what was the reality all along. The woman is and has always been emotionally/mentally ill. As I said: it's a volunteer army. No one held a gun to her son's head to join. In fact, I'm now suspecting he may have joined to establish himself as an adult/man and get away from his mom. I would be interested in hearing what her ex-husband has to say about all this.


Excellent point.

Jules
09-26-2005, 06:03 PM
In fact, I'm now suspecting he may have joined to establish himself as an adult/man and get away from his mom.

BINGO! I've thought that all along myself. And, her behavior here is probably the reason the hubby filed for divorce. I wonder what their marriage was like after he left home to go into the service. Hopefully at some point the hubby will do some talking. I'd be interested in what he had to say too.

IdahoMom
09-26-2005, 06:07 PM
Well, I think we may be seeing what was the reality all along. The woman is and has always been emotionally/mentally ill. As I said: it's a volunteer army. No one held a gun to her son's head to join. In fact, I'm now suspecting he may have joined to establish himself as an adult/man and get away from his mom. I would be interested in hearing what her ex-husband has to say about all this.Statement by some Sheehan family members

http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:8ddNTrfxd9QJ:www.drudgereport.com/flashcs.htm+family+of+cindy+Sheehan&hl=en

~snip~
In response to questions regarding the Cindy Sheehan/Crawford Texas issue: Sheehan Family Statement:

The Sheehan Family lost our beloved Casey in the Iraq War and we have been silently, respectfully grieving. We do not agree with the political motivations and publicity tactics of Cindy Sheehan. She now appears to be promoting her own personal agenda and notoriety at the the expense of her son's good name and reputation. The rest of the Sheehan Family supports the troops, our country, and our President, silently, with prayer and respect.

Sincerely,

Casey Sheehan's grandparents, aunts, uncles and numerous cousins.

~snip~

Jeana (DP)
09-26-2005, 06:09 PM
The piece quoted above, criticizing Ms. Sheehan's alleged lack of involvement in her son's upbringing after divorcing his father, is something fabricated out of whole cloth, evidently the product of someone's confusing a completely different family with the Sheehans. Cindy Sheehan and her husband, Patrick, were high school sweethearts who wed while both were in their early 20's and who have been married to each other for over 28 years. (Neither has ever been married to anyone else.) The couple had four children together, of whom Casey was the oldest. Both parents raised Casey together, first in the southern California community of Norwalk and later in the northern California town of Vacaville, where the Sheehans moved when Casey was 14.

Ms. Sheehan has maintained that her recent political activities placed a strain on her marriage that caused her and her husband to separate, as she expressed in an August 2005 interview:
Q: Have you lost any friends or family over this? Or, how do your husband and neighbors feel about your sudden rise to prominence in the media and the role you've accepted in those venues?

A: I have lost almost every friend that I had before Casey died. My husband and I are separated, because he doesn't support my activities, although he knows the war is a lie.

In fact, in August 2005 Patrick Sheehan filed for divorce, citing "irreconcilable differences" as the cause and stating that the couple had been separated since 1 June 2005. We're not aware of any interviews or news articles in which Mr. Sheehan has spoken publicly about his feelings regarding his son's death, his wife's political activities (and their effect on his marriage), or "the stance of America in Iraq and on
terror."

http://www.snopes.com/politics/war/sheehan.asp

arielilane
09-26-2005, 06:15 PM
Cindy is exercising her right. She is not dishonoring her son's legacy.

IdahoMom
09-26-2005, 06:18 PM
The piece quoted above, criticizing Ms. Sheehan's alleged lack of involvement in her son's upbringing after divorcing his father, is something fabricated out of whole cloth, evidently the product of someone's confusing a completely different family with the Sheehans.
Jeana-
Are you referring to my link or Snopes?

arielilane
09-26-2005, 06:19 PM
I really don't understand what people mean by "We really can't leave Iraq now"? I just don't understand why this statement? Can someone explain this?

ariel

tybee204
09-26-2005, 06:22 PM
Many parents that lost Sons in Vietnam came to protest the the Vietnam War. They were labled grief stricken, unstable and unpatriotic as well.

When parents encourage and support their children volunteering for Military Service they put faith and trust in the Government to not play politics with the lives of Americans. This war has been shown repeatedly to have begun under false pretenses, false information and false claims to both the the American citizens and the World.


This war is like going back 40 years in history and repeating the same mistakes.

That faith and trust is at times proven to be misplaced.

concernedperson
09-26-2005, 06:35 PM
Many parents that lost Sons in Vietnam came to protest the the Vietnam War. They were labled grief stricken, unstable and unpatriotic as well.

When parents encourage and support their children volunteering for Military Service they put faith and trust in the Government to not play politics with the lives of Americans. This war has been shown repeatedly to have begun under false pretenses, false information and false claims to both the the American citizens and the World.


This war is like going back 40 years in history and repeating the same mistakes.

That faith and trust is at times proven to be misplaced.

I couldn't agree more. I was so Bush supportive after 9-11.....I cried for ten days and looked forward to leadership for our devastated country. After layer and layer unfolded I was aghast. It all came down to supporting his father's presidency and his intolerance of Saddam. Who I agree was an evil human being....but he is one human being.Manufacturing lies to support a war that our young people are sent to die for is by far worse. And then we can look at now in our own country.......when I saw people on expressways in NO with no water and no evacuation and "F" dying and he says "Brownie you are doing a great job" well that should tell a whole nother picture.

nanandjim
09-26-2005, 07:07 PM
...This war has been shown repeatedly to have begun under false pretenses, false information and false claims to both the the American citizens and the World...
Although I don't like being in this war, I really feel that Saddam Hussein was a threat to our country and the free world, not to mention his own people. I am glad that we were on the offensive rather than the defensive. We will never know how many lives that we saved by acting first.

I just hope that it will not turn out to be another Vietnam. The world cannot afford for that to happen.

nanandjim
09-26-2005, 07:09 PM
I really don't understand what people mean by "We really can't leave Iraq now"? I just don't understand why this statement? Can someone explain this?

ariel
To me, it means that the people of Iraq would be sitting ducks for every terrorist organization in the world if we left them unprotected at this point. We need to protect them until they are stable enough to protect themselves. Did I use the word "protect" enough in my explanation?? :)

Jeana (DP)
09-26-2005, 07:29 PM
Jeana-
Are you referring to my link or Snopes?


I just pulled off of Snopes. I guess they first had the "wrong" info and then the "correct version." We must have posted about the same time because I missed your's completely!!!!! :D

Jeana (DP)
09-26-2005, 07:31 PM
Although I don't like being in this war, I really feel that Saddam Hussein was a threat to our country and the free world, not to mention his own people. I am glad that we were on the offensive rather than the defensive. We will never know how many lives that we saved by acting first.

I just hope that it will not turn out to be another Vietnam. The world cannot afford for that to happen.


I agree. I didn't wants us there in the first place. I feel if we're going to be there, we need to do it "right." I don't feel we have enough troops in place to protect them. I think we need to saturate the area and know whose doing what to whom.

Jules
09-26-2005, 08:05 PM
Although I don't like being in this war, I really feel that Saddam Hussein was a threat to our country and the free world, not to mention his own people. I am glad that we were on the offensive rather than the defensive. We will never know how many lives that we saved by acting first.

I just hope that it will not turn out to be another Vietnam. The world cannot afford for that to happen.

I agree Nan. I do feel that Saddam was a threat and that it was best to be on the offensive.

JDB
09-26-2005, 09:04 PM
I have held back posting on this one.Amazing what a few beers will do to you.There have been over 1900 soldiers lost due to Iraq.Right wrong or indifferent what kind of Message is Sheehan giving our troops there? I hoped they would have done this when she was in Texas.Amazing her own family does not support her.
Then you have the story about Pat Tillman Ex football player who was killed by Freindly Fire. I heard today he Thought Iraq was wrong, But he signed the dotted line to serve his country. Guess what I do not see his parents protesting anywhere. They understand,.

Jeana (DP)
09-26-2005, 09:18 PM
Beer?
I hope you brought enough for the whole class. :innocent: :innocent:

JDB
09-26-2005, 09:36 PM
Beer?
I hope you brought enough for the whole class. :innocent: :innocent:
Secret Stash Darling come and get it :blowkiss:

arielilane
09-26-2005, 09:40 PM
Many parents that lost Sons in Vietnam came to protest the the Vietnam War. They were labled grief stricken, unstable and unpatriotic as well.

When parents encourage and support their children volunteering for Military Service they put faith and trust in the Government to not play politics with the lives of Americans. This war has been shown repeatedly to have begun under false pretenses, false information and false claims to both the the American citizens and the World.


This war is like going back 40 years in history and repeating the same mistakes.

That faith and trust is at times proven to be misplaced.tybee,Thank you for stating this fact. You have me crying.

Jeana (DP)
09-26-2005, 09:40 PM
Secret Stash Darling come and get it :blowkiss:

http://bestsmileys.com/kissing1/1.gif

http://bestsmileys.com/expressions/9.gif

JDB
09-26-2005, 09:42 PM
http://bestsmileys.com/kissing1/1.gif

http://bestsmileys.com/expressions/9.gif
WHOOOO HOOOOO

concernedperson
09-26-2005, 09:44 PM
I support the troops. 100% and rightfully so. They are being sent into war zones with faith that they are doing a good thing. But what happens when it isn't the right thing do we denigrate them? No,of course not, we respect them for doing their duty and jump up the butt for the people who are responsible for sending them to a zone that was for political gain and not defending their country. And some people are just waking up. Remember Lyndon Johnson?

arielilane
09-26-2005, 09:53 PM
To me, it means that the people of Iraq would be sitting ducks for every terrorist organization in the world if we left them unprotected at this point. We need to protect them until they are stable enough to protect themselves. Did I use the word "protect" enough in my explanation?? :)
I guess this brings up more questions? Do we really care about the people of Iraq? After Iraq, what country will we pick, next? What country are we going to invade? So when all our Armed Forces are dead and the draft is in place, what are we going to do then? So who is going to help the children that have no fathers or mothers back home in the US? How are we going to tell these children why they don't have a father or a mother? Did you know that the US military women are not to be on the frontlines? Did you know that they are still being killed, because they are not allowed to go through combat training? Just for the record: Iraqi Civilian Deaths 26,092 (minimum).

arielilane
09-26-2005, 09:55 PM
Just because you are not in support of the war, doesn't mean you are not in support of the Troops.

tybee204
09-26-2005, 10:00 PM
I do not support this war but I have 2 USMC nephews in Iraq that I support with my full heart.

GonzoReiter
09-26-2005, 10:07 PM
if someone doesn't "support the war", they don't "support the troops" is just wrong...

and heaping ridicule on a woman who's lost her son in military service is so lame.

either method of debate speaks more of the person bringing it to the table than the object of their scorn.

arielilane
09-26-2005, 10:10 PM
To me, it means that the people of Iraq would be sitting ducks for every terrorist organization in the world if we left them unprotected at this point. We need to protect them until they are stable enough to protect themselves. Did I use the word "protect" enough in my explanation?? :)nanandjim, I do appreciate you replying and I hope I didn't sound like I was attacking you. That is not the case at all.
I understand what you are saying.

I am just better left not to discuss this topic.

I do support all our Troops. I don't support the war.

Jeana (DP)
09-26-2005, 10:13 PM
if someone doesn't "support the war", they don't "support the troops" is just wrong...

and heaping ridicule on a woman who's lost her son in military service is so lame.



I completely disagree. We, as Americans, have every right to discuss her protest of this war. Its a basic right. Just like her right to protest the President.

GonzoReiter
09-26-2005, 10:22 PM
I completely disagree. We, as Americans, have every right to discuss her protest of this war. Its a basic right. Just like her right to protest the President.
I agree with that statement, absolutely (read my post on the subject again).

Jeana (DP)
09-26-2005, 10:30 PM
I agree with that statement, absolutely (read my post on the subject again).


Done. . . do you consider my opinion "heaping ridicule"???

Jeana (DP)
09-26-2005, 10:35 PM
OHMYGOD~!!!!! SHE LOOKS TRAUMATIZED!!!!!!!!!!! Here's a picture of her being arrested . . . like these cops have NOTHING BETTER TO DO????

http://www.drudgereport.com/

BillyGoatGruff
09-26-2005, 10:42 PM
Statement by some Sheehan family members

http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:8ddNTrfxd9QJ:www.drudgereport.com/flashcs.htm+family+of+cindy+Sheehan&hl=en

~snip~
In response to questions regarding the Cindy Sheehan/Crawford Texas issue: Sheehan Family Statement:

The Sheehan Family lost our beloved Casey in the Iraq War and we have been silently, respectfully grieving. We do not agree with the political motivations and publicity tactics of Cindy Sheehan. She now appears to be promoting her own personal agenda and notoriety at the the expense of her son's good name and reputation. The rest of the Sheehan Family supports the troops, our country, and our President, silently, with prayer and respect.

Sincerely,

Casey Sheehan's grandparents, aunts, uncles and numerous cousins.

~snip~
Well, that says it all, doesn't it?

BillyGoatGruff
09-26-2005, 10:49 PM
OHMYGOD~!!!!! SHE LOOKS TRAUMATIZED!!!!!!!!!!! Here's a picture of her being arrested . . . like these cops have NOTHING BETTER TO DO????

http://www.drudgereport.com/
Actually THIS says it better than the family's press release. The woman's a narcissist. Perhaps some variant on Muchausen By Proxy. But whatever she is at that particular moment, it's neither grieving nor unhappy.

Lili
09-26-2005, 10:54 PM
First of all the family has my sympathy in the loss of their family member, as do all the people who have lost loved ones in this war. But I do not support with Cindy Sheehan is doing, I personally feel she is disgracing her son's choice to serve his country.

My heart also cries for those families in Iraq who have lived a life of hell due to their former leadership. We hear every day of the bombings and murders by terrorists, but we don't hear the good things happening. People gaining their freedom, women and children being allowed to attend school.

But honestly, IMO, this war in Iraq should have been done and over with 10 years ago. My husband and son were both involved in the Gulf War, and it was hell being here and worrying about them, but I never could grasp why Saddam Hussein wasn't targeted then.

Yes, Cindy made the front page again, with a big grin on her face..whoo-hoo. :twocents: :rolleyes:

GonzoReiter
09-26-2005, 10:54 PM
Done. . . do you consider my opinion "heaping ridicule"???
I don't think I was addressing any poster or post specifically...just expressing my opinion on 2 points of contention that are being expressed about Ms. Sheehan and my thoughts about those who use those "arguments". Obviously, if no one lowers themselves to that level...they've taken the high ground as you apparently have done and are to be commended.

And just as obvious, everyone is entitled to express their own opinion, even if it's far-fetched; i.e. someone diagnosing Ms Sheehan's mental state without benefit of extended interviews or access to medical records. The attempt to demonize the protagonist in that instance is self revealing and quite absurd in re a legitimate discussion of any topic from my POV.

I have no dog in the Sheehan hunt, other than my offering my sympathy for her tremendous loss...just made my observation about a strategy often employed in these sorts of discussion threads.

BillyGoatGruff
09-26-2005, 11:26 PM
I don't think I was addressing any poster or post specifically...just expressing my opinion on 2 points of contention that are being expressed about Ms. Sheehan and my thoughts about those who use those "arguments". Obviously, if no one lowers themselves to that level...they've taken the high ground as you apparently have done and are to be commended.

And just as obvious, everyone is entitled to express their own opinion, even if it's far-fetched; i.e. someone diagnosing Ms Sheehan's mental state without benefit of extended interviews or access to medical records. The attempt to demonize the protagonist in that instance is self revealing and quite absurd in re a legitimate discussion of any topic from my POV.

I have no dog in the Sheehan hunt, other than my offering my sympathy for her tremendous loss...just made my observation about a strategy often employed in these sorts of discussion threads.
Well, I'm sure a lot of people said the same about no one having access to Susan Smith's medical & psychiatric records when she was on television pleading for her sons' return, and kept setting off absolute strangers' "Soemthing Ain't Right Here" monitors. It's inappropriate body language and facial expressions. If someone is trying to come across as upset, grief stricken, etc. and the corners of their mouths keep turning up, and you can catch them actively turning them down--it's a warning sign that they have to remind themselves to look upset. It means you don't really believe what you're saying, or have any emotional investment in it. I saw it with Susan Smith, Scott Peterson, any number of politicans over the years, and now Cindy Sheehan. At first I gave the woman the benfit of the doubt, but the more exposure I've gotten to her, the less credible she has become. Turn the sound off and watch her. It's eye opening.

Marthatex
09-26-2005, 11:29 PM
Well, it's interesting how much discourse Ms. Sheehan has prompted even on this website today.

Even if the military is voluntary, that does not justify going into a war unless it is shown it is absolutely necessary and every other option is explored.

Saddam was not a threat yet to us, since he had no weapons of mass destruction; probably not as much as North Korea and Iran are today.

It might not have been such a bad idea to take him out quickly; but indeed we did not do the job "right"; we fumbled it. As far as "protecting" Iraqis, we are protecting them as much from their own people - will the Sunni's kills the Shiites, or will the Shiites dominate the Sunni's? The foreign terrorists have just joined in "mix". The likelihood of a civil war still looms high.

As far as time to pull out - we have alot invested now and their army cannot fight adequately. We don't know now if the Constituation will even be adopted, but we have to at least see if it is and try to keep training the troops. Middle East stability may be threatened even more if there is a Civil War.

On the other hand we could pull out eventually and just let the factions fight it out. I don't think anyone really knows what to do.

Yes, I remember Lyndon Johnson. His administration and his goals were overshadowed by the war. Deja vu. At least he didn't have hurricanes too.

Jeana (DP)
09-26-2005, 11:36 PM
Well, it's interesting how much discourse Ms. Sheehan has prompted even on this website today.

Even if the military is voluntary, that does not justify going into a war unless it is shown it is absolutely necessary and every other option is explored.



I agree insofar as the "government" itself is concerned. However, once one signs up to "fight for their country," they don't get to choose which war they fight.

Marthatex
09-26-2005, 11:43 PM
I agree insofar as the "government" itself is concerned. However, once one signs up to "fight for their country," they don't get to choose which war they fight.

No one said they did. But it was being argued that since they volunteered they shouldn't protest an illegitimate war.

Since our legislators and President are stewards of our precious young people, we depend on them to make the right decisions about whether to risk their lives or not; an especially to give them the best equipment and planning possible.

Jeana (DP)
09-26-2005, 11:47 PM
No one said they did. But it was being argued that since they volunteered they shouldn't protest an illegitimate war.
.


They shouldn't.

Marthatex
09-26-2005, 11:58 PM
Really? That's where we disagree of course. Never question authority? That can be dangerous.

GonzoReiter
09-27-2005, 12:18 AM
Pat Tillman was mentioned earlier
SFChronicle Story in Full (http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/object/article?f=/c/a/2005/09/25/MNGD7ETMNM1.DTL&o=0&type=printable)

Throughout the controversy, the Tillman family has been reluctant to cause a media stir. Mary noted that Pat shunned publicity, refusing all public comment when he enlisted and asking the Army to reject all media requests for interviews while he was in service. Pat’s widow, Marie, and his brother Kevin have not become publicly involved in the case, and they declined to comment for this article.

Yet other Tillman family members are less reluctant to show Tillman’s unique character, which was more complex than the public image of a gung-ho patriotic warrior. He started keeping a journal at 16 and continued the practice on the battlefield, writing in it regularly. (His journal was lost immediately after his death.) Mary Tillman said a friend of Pat’s even arranged a private meeting with Chomsky, the antiwar author, to take place after his return from Afghanistan — a meeting prevented by his death. She said that although he supported the Afghan war, believing it justified by the Sept. 11 attacks, “Pat was very critical of the whole Iraq war.”

Baer, who served with Tillman for more than a year in Iraq and Afghanistan, told one anecdote that took place during the March 2003 invasion as the Rangers moved up through southern Iraq.

“I can see it like a movie screen,” Baer said. “We were outside of (a city in southern Iraq) watching as bombs were dropping on the town. We were at an old air base, me, Kevin and Pat, we weren’t in the fight right then. We were talking. And Pat said, ‘You know, this war is so f— illegal.’ And we all said, ‘Yeah.’ That’s who he was. He totally was against Bush.”

Another soldier in the platoon, who asked not to be identified, said Pat urged him to vote for Bush’s Democratic opponent in the 2004 election, Sen. John Kerry.

Senior Chief Petty Officer Stephen White — a Navy SEAL who served with Pat and Kevin for four months in Iraq and was the only military member to speak at Tillman’s memorial — said Pat “wasn’t very fired up about being in Iraq” and instead wanted to go fight al Qaeda in Afghanistan. He said both Pat and Kevin (who has a degree in philosophy) “were amazingly well-read individuals … very firm in some of their beliefs, their political and religious or not so religious beliefs.”

For reasons obvious to anyone who knows me, I've followed this story closely for more than 3 years. It's a story worth keeping an eye on...not necessarily because of this thread topic.

Marthatex
09-27-2005, 12:56 AM
It's kind of ironic that he was for Kerry, but the Bush administration capitalized upon his death to rabble-rouse for the Iraq war. That's very sad but even sadder was the way they weren't honest with his family about his death.

Jeana (DP)
09-27-2005, 11:01 AM
Really? That's where we disagree of course. Never question authority? That can be dangerous.


What I said was that once a soldier signs up for the military, they do what they're told. Certainly, if they feel they can't shoot somone once they get into battle, they can be assigned a different job, if the military agrees. However, they don't get to "not go" because they object to the reason we're there.

Marthatex
09-27-2005, 01:53 PM
I was referring to protesting the war, or disagreeing with it. Of course they have to go fight whatever war, once they have signed up.

But we depend on the higher-ups to make wise decisions regarding the huge expenditure and human cost of a war.

jannuncutt
09-27-2005, 02:11 PM
It burns me up whevever I think of how our troops were manipulated. True, we have a volunteer army. It is also true that a lot of our kids signed up after September 11th, to go after the terrorists who attacked us. But, that is not what happened. We attacked Iraq, based on a lie told to us by George Bush. He said that there were WMDs in Iraq - which were a threat to us. There were no WMDs and, he didn't care whether there were or not. He just wanted to get Saddam. We were supposed to be going after Osama. What we are doing in Iraq has nothing to do with the destruction that was done to us.

Marthatex
09-27-2005, 02:39 PM
I agree with everything you just said.

dasgal
09-27-2005, 02:49 PM
When I met with Cindy in Crawford, she was wanting to get arrested. From what one of her Camp Casey friends said, it was something that would make people get off the fence and make a stand.

I really liked her. In fact, I liked everyone I met at Camp Casey. I've got a son in the Air Force. He was supposed to go to Iraq in a few weeks but ended up being diverted to help rebuild New Orleans. But I went a long time thinking he was going to Bagdad. When I was in Crawford, I spoke to a ton of other mothers who had sons going or already there. From a mother's standpoint I can totally understand Cindy's grief.

Beyond that, the lady asks some pretty darn good questions.

And please know that I would never diminish the grief of the counter protesters that lost their children too. My heart goes out to everyone in that position.

sandraladeda
09-27-2005, 04:10 PM
Many parents that lost Sons in Vietnam came to protest the the Vietnam War. They were labled grief stricken, unstable and unpatriotic as well.

When parents encourage and support their children volunteering for Military Service they put faith and trust in the Government to not play politics with the lives of Americans. This war has been shown repeatedly to have begun under false pretenses, false information and false claims to both the the American citizens and the World.
Right on. I am sure this is a very big factor in Mrs. Sheehan's inability to let go and move on - the sheer senselessness of the war her son was fighting. Losing a son could never be easy, but perhaps she could accept it if she at least felt that he died for a righteous cause.

I feel very sorry for her. Although her protests seem to have gone over the top, I feel she has been abandoned by all her friends and family, when she needs them the most. I think that she is throwing herself into protesting this war and in doing so, is avoiding facing up to the reality of her son's death. If she gives up the fight, she will have to grieve. I think she'd rather fight fiercely than face up to that. I wish she had some family or friends on her side to gently support her and guide her away from her angry war on Bush instead of washing their hands of her.

IMHO

dasgal
09-27-2005, 04:30 PM
Hi Sandra,

When I met her, she was with her sister so she's got some family sticking with her. As for her friends, I don't know who her old friends were, but she's got a ton of loyal friends with her now.

jannuncutt
09-27-2005, 04:33 PM
I agree with everything you just said. I've really got to tell ya, Martha - I have been agreeing with all of your posts on this thread!

BillyGoatGruff
09-27-2005, 04:48 PM
No one said they did. But it was being argued that since they volunteered they shouldn't protest an illegitimate war.

Since our legislators and President are stewards of our precious young people, we depend on them to make the right decisions about whether to risk their lives or not; an especially to give them the best equipment and planning possible.
When you join the armed forces, you sign a contract with the United States government, which details, in very specific langauge, what you can and can't do while under its employ. You surrender certain things in exchange for certain benefits. If every soldier had the right to refuse to serve as he/she saw fit, the military would fall apart within 2 weeks. In reality, the only way you will have the peoplein charge being more cautious regarding where and how we utilize our troops is if the draft is reinstated. That way EVERYONE'S kids are at risk, not just the sons and daughters of the inner city, rural communities & foreigners looking to gain citizenship. The Romans decided they were too good to serve in their own army, and look where it got them.

jannuncutt
09-28-2005, 09:03 AM
Well, that says it all, doesn't it? Not to me, it doesn't. She is his Mother - she gave him birth - not them.

Marthatex
09-28-2005, 10:21 AM
When you join the armed forces, you sign a contract with the United States government, which details, in very specific langauge, what you can and can't do while under its employ. You surrender certain things in exchange for certain benefits. If every soldier had the right to refuse to serve as he/she saw fit, the military would fall apart within 2 weeks. In reality, the only way you will have the peoplein charge being more cautious regarding where and how we utilize our troops is if the draft is reinstated. That way EVERYONE'S kids are at risk, not just the sons and daughters of the inner city, rural communities & foreigners looking to gain citizenship. The Romans decided they were too good to serve in their own army, and look where it got them.

The decision to go to war should have nothing to do with who's in our army and whether they volunteered or not.

Colin Powell got up and delivered a speech to the U.N. that unknowingly to him was filled with falsehoods. We should not have gone to war. Period.

JDB
09-28-2005, 01:23 PM
The decision to go to war should have nothing to do with who's in our army and whether they volunteered or not.

Colin Powell got up and delivered a speech to the U.N. that unknowingly to him was filled with falsehoods. We should not have gone to war. Period.

We should not have done a lot of things. Like knowing way back before Bush took office that there was plans for an attack on US soil. Did we do anything NO!!!!!!! We sat on our hands knowing of the threat.We should have not sent troops to Bosina . We should have not gone to Viet Nam. There are alot of things we should not have done. But we being in The US did. And Mrs Sheehans got what she wanted from the git go in the public eyes and arrested. And I turly feel sorry for all the other families that have lost love one in IRAQ. In fact there is a lady here in the Bay area who lost her son to friendly fire which was covered up by the Army. She was with Sheehan in DC to protest. But she also has a level head to listen to the Army about what actually happened and was satisfied the Miltary are doing there best to correct the wrong. And yes she flew home on Monday after her one on one.

America either we stand behind it or we all sit back and watch as it dissovle in to utter turmoil.

jannuncutt
09-28-2005, 01:28 PM
We should not have done a lot of things. Like knowing way back before Bush took office that there was plans for an attack on US soil. Did we do anything NO!!!!!!! We sat on our hands knowing of the threat.We should have not sent troops to Bosina . We should have not gone to Viet Nam. There are alot of things we should not have done. But we being in The US did. And Mrs Sheehans got what she wanted from the git go in the public eyes and arrested. And I turly feel sorry for all the other families that have lost love one in IRAQ. In fact there is a lady here in the Bay area who lost her son to friendly fire which was covered up by the Army. She was with Sheehan in DC to protest. But she also has a level head to listen to the Army about what actually happened and was satisfied the Miltary are doing there best to correct the wrong. And yes she flew home on Monday after her one on one.

America either we stand behind it or we all sit back and watch as it dissovle in to utter turmoil. I believe that Cindy Sheehan's protests are against Bush and his policies - not the U.S. Military. Also, standing behind America does not necessarily mean standing behind Bush.

JDB
09-28-2005, 01:29 PM
I believe that Cindy Sheehan's protests are against Bush and his policies - not the U.S. Military.
OHHH But who is the commander and Chief of the Miltary Also I think she is more upset that he will not give her a one on one. Now if every parent wife or Husband asked for that from the president how much time would that take. The lady from the Bay area went the correct route she went to the army for answers.

Jeana (DP)
09-28-2005, 01:30 PM
We should not have done a lot of things. Like knowing way back before Bush took office that there was plans for an attack on US soil. Did we do anything NO!!!!!!! We sat on our hands knowing of the threat.We should have not sent troops to Bosina . We should have not gone to Viet Nam. There are alot of things we should not have done. But we being in The US did. And Mrs Sheehans got what she wanted from the git go in the public eyes and arrested. And I turly feel sorry for all the other families that have lost love one in IRAQ. In fact there is a lady here in the Bay area who lost her son to friendly fire which was covered up by the Army. She was with Sheehan in DC to protest. But she also has a level head to listen to the Army about what actually happened and was satisfied the Miltary are doing there best to correct the wrong. And yes she flew home on Monday after her one on one.

America either we stand behind it or we all sit back and watch as it dissovle in to utter turmoil.


YEAH!!!! WHAT HE SAID!!!!

:woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo:

http://bestsmileys.com/usa1/15.gif

http://bestsmileys.com/army/1.gif
:blowkiss: :blowkiss: :blowkiss: :blowkiss:

dasgal
09-28-2005, 01:31 PM
OHHH But who is the commander and Chief of the Miltary
Karl Rove?:p J/K

jannuncutt
09-28-2005, 01:34 PM
OHHH But who is the commander and Chief of the Miltary Also I think she is more upset that he will not give her a one on one. Now if every parent wife or Husband asked for that from the president how much time would that take. The lady from the Bay area went the correct route she went to the army for answers.
Whoever is President is the Commander and Chief of the Military - I know that - so what? The Military will always be there, no matter who the Commander and Chief is. I don't like his policies. I don't like the way he has used the U.S. Military to get that man "who tried to kill my dad".

Marthatex
09-28-2005, 01:34 PM
If you read the first of the thread, (JDB) I no longer support Ms. Sheehan or her actions.

I do not believe in getting arrested on purpose unless you're trying to save an innocent person's life. Disrespect for the law only undermines credibility.

Mypoint about military decisions was in response to Gruff's intimation that there is a difference when we have a volunteer or draft army. There should be no difference at all.

I also stated later on that we can't leave Iraq now.

Shouldn't have sent troops to Bosnia? That was an example of a well-executed plan; as was the first Gulf War except we were afraid to finish the job.

jannuncutt
09-28-2005, 01:41 PM
If you read the first of the thread, (JDB) I no longer support Ms. Sheehan or her actions.

I do not believe in getting arrested on purpose unless you're trying to save an innocent person's life. Disrespect for the law only undermines credibility.

Mypoint about military decisions was in response to Gruff's intimation that there is a difference when we have a volunteer or draft army. There should be no difference at all.

I also stated later on that we can't leave Iraq now.

Shouldn't have sent troops to Bosnia? That was an example of a well-executed plan; as was the first Gulf War except we were afraid to finish the job.
It seemed to me that Cindy Sheehan looked happy as she was being carried away by the police. I support her cause, however, I don't support her disobedience to the law. I worry that she is being manipulated. I also hope that she is not letting her "celebrity" go to her head. I hope that her sister who is with her is clear-headed and watching out for Cindy.

JDB
09-28-2005, 01:49 PM
Whoever is President is the Commander and Chief of the Military - I know that - so what? The Military will always be there, no matter who the Commander and Chief is. I don't like his policies. I don't like the way he has used the U.S. Military to get that man "who tried to kill my dad".


Gee unless I missed something in the last few minutes we are not ran by a DICTAOR. Seems I recall we still have a senate and a congress. So whe you say HIS policies I think the proper wording shoul be Thier policies.

jannuncutt
09-28-2005, 01:52 PM
Gee unless I missed something in the last few minutes we are not ran by a DICTAOR. Seems I recall we still have a senate and a congress. So whe you say HIS policies I think the proper wording shoul be Thier policies.
Because he lied.

JDB
09-28-2005, 01:53 PM
Because he lied.
CAn you please name me one presdident that has not lied when in office? Just ONE

jannuncutt
09-28-2005, 01:57 PM
CAn you please name me one presdident that has not lied when in office? Just ONE
No, I'm not going to play that game. Too many people are dying because of his lies.

JDB
09-28-2005, 02:02 PM
No, I'm not going to play that game. Too many people are dying because of his lies.

Ok I will accept that. But also please keep in mind how many people died on 9/11 because we knew there was a threat before BUSH but we sat on our hands doing nothing.

Marthatex
09-28-2005, 02:03 PM
Yes, we all remember that Congress voted on the war. Congress is also more Republican than Democrat at the present time; therefore supporting the President's policies more often than not.

But partisanship was not the issue when we voted on the Iraq war. The war on terror was. Unfortunately, Iraq was linked to the war on terror by the Republican administration, as well as weapons of mass destruction, and Congress' decision was based upon false information.

We all know how we got into the war, and there is no real use in debating it now. The issue now is: How to we quell the insurgency, how do we build Iraq in the face of continuing insurgency, when do we begin to withdraw the troops and eventually get out, leaving Iraq with enough physical and political integrity to survive on their own?

As General Myers said yesterday, they realize now that it will take more than military might to quell the insurgency. Many other factors are involved.

jannuncutt
09-28-2005, 02:13 PM
Ok I will accept that. But also please keep in mind how many people died on 9/11 because we knew there was a threat before BUSH but we sat on our hands doing nothing.
True. However, the threat was not from Iraq.

BillyGoatGruff
09-28-2005, 02:18 PM
Not to me, it doesn't. She is his Mother - she gave him birth - not them.
And what about his father? Does he have no say simply because he didn't squirt the child from his belly? Placing more value on a relative simply because they have a womb and carried the child for 9 months is beyond silly, given the fact that the state has to step in to so many situations where birth mothes are clearly not operating in the best interest of their children.

Marthatex
09-28-2005, 02:28 PM
And what about his father? Does he have no say simply because he didn't squirt the child from his belly? Placing more value on a relative simply because they have a womb and carried the child for 9 months is beyond silly, given the fact that the state has to step in to so many situations where birth mothes are clearly not operating in the best interest of their children.

Obviously you have not given birth.

A father is just as important as a mother, unless they're a "deadbeat" father.

But Cindy is the mother and she has the right to protest if she wanted to. She doesn't have the right to break the law. But she's "crashing and burning", so I don't know why anyone should even care anymore what she does.

BillyGoatGruff
09-28-2005, 02:40 PM
The decision to go to war should have nothing to do with who's in our army and whether they volunteered or not.

Colin Powell got up and delivered a speech to the U.N. that unknowingly to him was filled with falsehoods. We should not have gone to war. Period.
You just don't get it.
Open a history book. Read about stuff that happened before the Viet Nam War, since that seems to be the only touchstone you and the other protestors have. Read beyind the Second World War, for that matter. Read about OTHER countries wars.
We are in our Hundred Year War.
We have been in it for approximately 25/30 years now, although we have only been aware of the fact as a people sicne 9/11/2001.
It started when we didn't back the Shah of Iran and allowed him to be deposed and replaced by the Ayatollah.
If history is anything to go by, we will be in it for another 60-75 years. It will end with either a gradually modernized Middle East with democratic, secular governments or a balkanized America. Perhaps both.
It disturbs me that our country's political parties have dissolved into do-nothing senates/congresses that spend all their time in partisan bickering & character assassination instead of coming up with much needed legislature to fix various economic and social problems,regardless of who is in office. The resemblance to the French Assembly leading up to the Terror is exceptionally unnerving. And since that's where we got all this divisive "Left"/"Right" B.S. in the first place, it pays to take notice of such similiarities.
We have become spoiled, soft and stupid. We think neither weather patterns or anything else that inconvenciences us is our "right" as Americans. We think everything is to be handed to us. This is Baby Boomer thinking, born of wealth and isolation, wheher you're living in a commune funded by trust funds or a gated gold community. Neither Right nor Left seems to believe that it should be held accountable for its decisions. But what bugs me the most is the Left's inability to acknowledge its as rigid in its thinking and predictable in its responses as the Right.

jannuncutt
09-28-2005, 02:44 PM
And what about his father? Does he have no say simply because he didn't squirt the child from his belly? Placing more value on a relative simply because they have a womb and carried the child for 9 months is beyond silly, given the fact that the state has to step in to so many situations where birth mothes are clearly not operating in the best interest of their children.
I was simply responding to the Sheehan Family Statement, which you posted, and your subsequent comment. That statement was submitted by the grandparents, aunts, uncles and cousins - not the father of Cindy's son. Of course, there are exceptions to every rule, however, under normal circumstances, nothing can compare to a mother's love. Also, I find your statement regarding the birthing process to be quite crude, Billy.

Jeana (DP)
09-28-2005, 02:47 PM
But she's "crashing and burning", so I don't know why anyone should even care anymore what she does.


I refer you to the title of this thread. You're not being forced to participate in this topic, Martha. So maybe you should allow those of us who want to talk about it do so.

Jeana (DP)
09-28-2005, 02:49 PM
I was simply responding to the Sheehan Family Statement, which you posted, and your subsequent comment. That statement was submitted by the grandparents, aunts, uncles and cousins - not the father of Cindy's son. Of course, there are exceptions to every rule, however, under normal circumstances, nothing can compare to a mother's love. Also, I find your statement regarding the birthing process to be quite crude, Billy.


Mr. Sheehan is (or did) divorce Cindy, so I think its a safe bet to say that he doesn't support what she's doing and he supports the war effort. He's not, however, making a spectacle of himself. Does that mean his opinion matters less than hers? Of course not. Takes two to make a baby. She's not the only one who suffered a loss, but she continues to drag her family through all the drama. Very selfish if you ask me.

jannuncutt
09-28-2005, 02:58 PM
Mr. Sheehan is (or did) divorce Cindy, so I think its a safe bet to say that he doesn't support what she's doing and he supports the war effort. He's not, however, making a spectacle of himself. Does that mean his opinion matters less than hers? Of course not. Takes two to make a baby. She's not the only one who suffered a loss, but she continues to drag her family through all the drama. Very selfish if you ask me.
I was responding specifically to the family statement!

Marthatex
09-28-2005, 03:06 PM
I refer you to the title of this thread. You're not being forced to participate in this topic, Martha. So maybe you should allow those of us who want to talk about it do so.

Was this really necessary? Just who is disallowing whom's comments?

The implication is that I am not "allowing" others to speak. I was merely making a rhetorical comment and made no direct criticism of anyone.

My comments on this thread have been objective and historical in nature, as much as anyone elses.

BarnGoddess
09-28-2005, 03:19 PM
If you read the first of the thread, (JDB) I no longer support Ms. Sheehan or her actions.

I do not believe in getting arrested on purpose unless you're trying to save an innocent person's life. Disrespect for the law only undermines credibility.

Mypoint about military decisions was in response to Gruff's intimation that there is a difference when we have a volunteer or draft army. There should be no difference at all.

I also stated later on that we can't leave Iraq now.

Shouldn't have sent troops to Bosnia? That was an example of a well-executed plan; as was the first Gulf War except we were afraid to finish the job.
Everyone missed this part of Martha's post. I guess it depends whose ox is gored. Or is it who's political party is in power?

jannuncutt
09-28-2005, 03:26 PM
Was this really necessary? Just who is disallowing whom's comments?

The implication is that I am not "allowing" others to speak. I was merely making a rhetorical comment and made no direct criticism of anyone.

My comments on this thread have been objective and historical in nature, as much as anyone elses. Martha, I am enjoying your comments on this thread. Geesh, we finally agree on something! ;)

Marthatex
09-28-2005, 05:03 PM
You just don't get it.
Open a history book. Read about stuff that happened before the Viet Nam War, since that seems to be the only touchstone you and the other protestors have. Read beyind the Second World War, for that matter. Read about OTHER countries wars.
We are in our Hundred Year War.
We have been in it for approximately 25/30 years now, although we have only been aware of the fact as a people sicne 9/11/2001.
It started when we didn't back the Shah of Iran and allowed him to be deposed and replaced by the Ayatollah.
If history is anything to go by, we will be in it for another 60-75 years. It will end with either a gradually modernized Middle East with democratic, secular governments or a balkanized America. Perhaps both.
It disturbs me that our country's political parties have dissolved into do-nothing senates/congresses that spend all their time in partisan bickering & character assassination instead of coming up with much needed legislature to fix various economic and social problems,regardless of who is in office. The resemblance to the French Assembly leading up to the Terror is exceptionally unnerving. And since that's where we got all this divisive "Left"/"Right" B.S. in the first place, it pays to take notice of such similiarities.
We have become spoiled, soft and stupid. We think neither weather patterns or anything else that inconvenciences us is our "right" as Americans. We think everything is to be handed to us. This is Baby Boomer thinking, born of wealth and isolation, wheher you're living in a commune funded by trust funds or a gated gold community. Neither Right nor Left seems to believe that it should be held accountable for its decisions. But what bugs me the most is the Left's inability to acknowledge its as rigid in its thinking and predictable in its responses as the Right.

Much of what you say may be true. Many of us are "spoiled, soft and stupid", but if that is so then why to we so highly value our ways and the United States of America? Our freedom to be spoiled? Surely our founding fathers valued education and wanted us to be frugal, with our money and our land and resources.

I doubt that many of us are totally well-read regarding world history and all wars of the past, myself included. However, I do try to keep up with current events.

I do not believe you can make the generalization that "the left", whatever that represents, is more rigid than the right. "The left" can include the "far left", or people with more centrist views. All I know is that at first I supported Ms. Sheenan; now I do not. I used to not be aware of immigration as a problem but now I feel it is. I have voted for Republican presidents as well as Democratic ones.

And for the record, I am not a "protestor"; I never demonstrated against the Viet Nam war and I am not demonstrating now. It seems you have put me under a "label", and that is pretty "rigid" to me.

Jeana (DP)
09-28-2005, 07:49 PM
Was this really necessary? Just who is disallowing whom's comments?

The implication is that I am not "allowing" others to speak. I was merely making a rhetorical comment and made no direct criticism of anyone.

My comments on this thread have been objective and historical in nature, as much as anyone elses.


You're welcome to comment - as always.

BillyGoatGruff
09-28-2005, 10:27 PM
Much of what you say may be true. Many of us are "spoiled, soft and stupid", but if that is so then why to we so highly value our ways and the United States of America? Our freedom to be spoiled? Surely our founding fathers valued education and wanted us to be frugal, with our money and our land and resources.

I doubt that many of us are totally well-read regarding world history and all wars of the past, myself included. However, I do try to keep up with current events.

I do not believe you can make the generalization that "the left", whatever that represents, is more rigid than the right. "The left" can include the "far left", or people with more centrist views. All I know is that at first I supported Ms. Sheenan; now I do not. I used to not be aware of immigration as a problem but now I feel it is. I have voted for Republican presidents as well as Democratic ones.

And for the record, I am not a "protestor"; I never demonstrated against the Viet Nam war and I am not demonstrating now. It seems you have put me under a "label", and that is pretty "rigid" to me.
I didn't say MORE rigid as the Right. I said AS. But in terms of Left and Right, if you go Far Enough Left, you end up in the same crackpot area as the Far Right. Hitler was a Fascist and Pol Pot a Communist, but you couldn't tell the difference in their worldviews by the results. No one seems interested in centrist resolutions or moderation. Republics are supposed to be based on give and take, mediation, etc. I see precious little of that today, and now with Delay there will be more pointless political wranglinga nd dust-ups to excuse the fact no one in office is pushing any necessary legislature. This is why I adhere to no party affilaition. They all suck donkey balls.

ember
09-29-2005, 11:54 PM
stay gone...alas, it is just not to be...


True. However, the threat was not from Iraq.This is my very first post, though I have lurked a while. I had to weigh in on this one.

I would like to know how you know that the threat was not from Iraq. Do you have inside knowledge? Please do not believe everything that has been "thoroughly investigated". I work for the gov't. Trust me on this one.

Saddam was madman without a soul who slayed his own people by the thousands & already hated us for what the first Bush admin did to his dictatorship. Given the chance, he would have volleyed. It is just too bad Bush Sr. didn't have the backing that Bush Jr. has to see it through. Iraq is an absolute threat. Isn't Al-Zarqawi now Bin Laden's right hand man? Al-Qaeda in IRAQ? Behead a few innocent contractors and become the golden child to Bin Laden? Maybe Bush did jump the gun on Iraq as a son's favor, but I believe he was on the right track. A terrorist is a terrorist no matter where they call home and they HATE us and our freedom. Believe that.

The smiling Cindy Sheehan being led off by police made me ill. She IS making a mockery of her son's service. He VOLUNTEERED and loved his country. DIED for it. He knew the risks. Maybe to him, the job rewards were compensation enough. In his job there, he FREED people. People who will vote. Just like our soliders did in Afghanistan. Soon these people will vote. VOTE! I know we take it for granted, but to them...wow...it is life altering. 50% of these voters are women. Women who never had a voice before. It really is profound when you think about it. I hope the Afghan & Iraqi women use there new found rights better than one liberator's mother has. Ironic that Cindy uses the same rights given to her by men & women, like her son, who have given their lives, so that she can stand on her righteous soap box and say it is all for naught. That just disgusts me.

I'm far from a warmonger. I value life, all life. But I'm no dummy either. If we cut & run now, we empower those blood-thirsty,third-world, insane religious extremists. I don't know about you guys, but I don't want that element over here on our own soil. Americans are NOT quitters.

We have service people fighting terror all over the world, not just in Iraq. Kosovo, Bosnia, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan to name a few. This is not a game folks. Our guys and gals who are serving are in real danger to keep us safe.

Blessed be our service people now and all who have gone before. They need our love and support, not our criticism.

Jules
09-29-2005, 11:58 PM
stay gone...alas, it is just not to be...

This is my very first post, though I have lurked a while. I had to weigh in on this one.

I would like to know how you know that the threat was not from Iraq. Do you have inside knowledge? Please do not believe everything that has been "thoroughly investigated". I work for the gov't. Trust me on this one.

Saddam was madman without a soul who slayed his own people by the thousands & already hated us for what the first Bush admin did to his dictatorship. Given the chance, he would have volleyed. It is just too bad Bush Sr. didn't have the backing that Bush Jr. has to see it through. Iraq is an absolute threat. Isn't Al-Zarqawi now Bin Laden's right hand man? Al-Qaeda in IRAQ? Behead a few innocent contractors and become the golden child to Bin Laden? Maybe Bush did jump the gun on Iraq as a son's favor, but I believe he was on the right track. A terrorist is a terrorist no matter where they call home and they HATE us and our freedom. Believe that.

The smiling Cindy Sheehan being led off by police made me ill. She IS making a mockery of her son's service. He VOLUNTEERED and loved his country. DIED for it. He knew the risks. Maybe to him, the job rewards were compensation enough. In his job there, he FREED people. People who will vote. Just like our soliders did in Afghanistan. Soon these people will vote. VOTE! I know we take it for granted, but to them...wow...it is life altering. 50% of these voters are women. Women who never had a voice before. It really is profound when you think about it. I hope the Afghan & Iraqi women use there new found rights better than one liberator's mother has. Ironic that Cindy uses the same rights given to her by men & women, like her son, who have given their lives, so that she can stand on her righteous soap box and say it is all for naught. That just disgusts me.

I'm far from a warmonger. I value life, all life. But I'm no dummy either. If we cut & run now, we empower those blood-thirsty,third-world, insane religious extremists. I don't know about you guys, but I don't want that element over here on our own soil. Americans are NOT quitters.

We have service people fighting terror all over the world, not just in Iraq. Kosovo, Bosnia, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan to name a few. This is not a game folks. Our guys and gals who are serving are in real danger to keep us safe.

Blessed be our service people now and all who have gone before. They need our love and support, not our criticism.

:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

What a fantastic first post and welcome to the board!

ember
09-30-2005, 12:08 AM
:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

What a fantastic first post and welcome to the board!
Thank you Jules :blowkiss: . Glad to be here.

I am very passionate about this issue. My father was a Vietnam Vet. My grandfather was a WWII POW, captured at the Battle of the Bulge. Both would say that everyone should have the opportunity to be free.

Both would also decry Cindy Sheehan's actions as traitorous to her son's legacy. I feel that she is grieving and I am so sorry for her loss. Being a mother myself, I can't even begin to imagine, but she really needs to find another outlet and quit making a propaganda wagon out of herself. Enough about that though. I've ranted long enough, lol.

Thanks again for welcoming me. I look forward to many more posts on WS!

JBean
09-30-2005, 12:13 AM
Thank you Jules :blowkiss: . Glad to be here.

I am very passionate about this issue. My father was a Vietnam Vet. My grandfather was a WWII POW, captured at the Battle of the Bulge. Both would say that everyone should have the opportunity to be free.

Both would also decry Cindy Sheehan's actions as traitorous to her son's legacy. I feel that she is grieving and I am so sorry for her loss. Being a mother myself, I can't even begin to imagine, but she really needs to find another outlet and quit making a propaganda wagon out of herself. Enough about that though. I've ranted long enough, lol.

Thanks again for welcoming me. I look forward to many more posts on WS!welcome ember..great posts.

Jules
09-30-2005, 12:16 AM
Thank you Jules :blowkiss: . Glad to be here.

I am very passionate about this issue. My father was a Vietnam Vet. My grandfather was a WWII POW, captured at the Battle of the Bulge. Both would say that everyone should have the opportunity to be free.

Both would also decry Cindy Sheehan's actions as traitorous to her son's legacy. I feel that she is grieving and I am so sorry for her loss. Being a mother myself, I can't even begin to imagine, but she really needs to find another outlet and quit making a propaganda wagon out of herself. Enough about that though. I've ranted long enough, lol.

Thanks again for welcoming me. I look forward to many more posts on WS!

Most welcome. Look forward to seeing you around. :blowkiss:

ember
09-30-2005, 12:19 AM
welcome ember..great posts.
Thanks to you too JBean! Again, glad to be here. Love WS!
Here's :blowkiss: for you too!

Nova
09-30-2005, 01:00 AM
Although I don't like being in this war, I really feel that Saddam Hussein was a threat to our country and the free world, not to mention his own people. I am glad that we were on the offensive rather than the defensive. We will never know how many lives that we saved by acting first.

I just hope that it will not turn out to be another Vietnam. The world cannot afford for that to happen.

As far as we know, we haven't saved ONE life by invading Iraq.

But we know we've lost uncounted tens of thousands of lives.

What sort of logic is it that justifies tens of thousands of deaths on the ground that something might have happened? And calls a mother crazy because she protests the very real death of her son and others based on false pretenses and dubious intentions?

Yes, our soldiers today volunteer to serve and they are to be honored all the more for joining of their own volition. But that doesn't mean their service and sacrifice are to be spent cheaply by unscrupulous politicans - or by citizens who value our soldiers so lightly as to spend the lives of volunteers on "might," "perhaps" and "maybe."

jannuncutt
09-30-2005, 09:43 AM
stay gone...alas, it is just not to be...

This is my very first post, though I have lurked a while. I had to weigh in on this one.

I would like to know how you know that the threat was not from Iraq. Do you have inside knowledge? Please do not believe everything that has been "thoroughly investigated". I work for the gov't. Trust me on this one.

Saddam was madman without a soul who slayed his own people by the thousands & already hated us for what the first Bush admin did to his dictatorship. Given the chance, he would have volleyed. It is just too bad Bush Sr. didn't have the backing that Bush Jr. has to see it through. Iraq is an absolute threat. Isn't Al-Zarqawi now Bin Laden's right hand man? Al-Qaeda in IRAQ? Behead a few innocent contractors and become the golden child to Bin Laden? Maybe Bush did jump the gun on Iraq as a son's favor, but I believe he was on the right track. A terrorist is a terrorist no matter where they call home and they HATE us and our freedom. Believe that.

The smiling Cindy Sheehan being led off by police made me ill. She IS making a mockery of her son's service. He VOLUNTEERED and loved his country. DIED for it. He knew the risks. Maybe to him, the job rewards were compensation enough. In his job there, he FREED people. People who will vote. Just like our soliders did in Afghanistan. Soon these people will vote. VOTE! I know we take it for granted, but to them...wow...it is life altering. 50% of these voters are women. Women who never had a voice before. It really is profound when you think about it. I hope the Afghan & Iraqi women use there new found rights better than one liberator's mother has. Ironic that Cindy uses the same rights given to her by men & women, like her son, who have given their lives, so that she can stand on her righteous soap box and say it is all for naught. That just disgusts me.

I'm far from a warmonger. I value life, all life. But I'm no dummy either. If we cut & run now, we empower those blood-thirsty,third-world, insane religious extremists. I don't know about you guys, but I don't want that element over here on our own soil. Americans are NOT quitters.

We have service people fighting terror all over the world, not just in Iraq. Kosovo, Bosnia, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan to name a few. This is not a game folks. Our guys and gals who are serving are in real danger to keep us safe.

Blessed be our service people now and all who have gone before. They need our love and support, not our criticism.
I believe that George Bush used tradgedy of September 11th, as an excuse to go after Saddam. He lied to the country about the WMDs in order to justify going to war. Now, we are in a big mess. He used to boast to Bin Laden "you can run but, you can't hide" Apparently, he misspoke, huh? He doen't even mention Bin Laden anymore.

Marthatex
09-30-2005, 10:19 AM
Karen Hughes is over there trying to communicate and "improve our image" with other middle eastern countries. We may not be quitters, but in case no one has noticed our approach has been "adjusted" a little bit.

We're not hearing so much about "axis of evil" and "bring 'em on". No one wants to quit, but it's important for mistakes to be learned from, especially if adjustments can be made to the strategy of the war.

Why didn't we continue going after the terrorists and terrorist camps, rather than try to take over an entire country? The terrorists were and are in many countries. There are tons of them now in Iraq because many have joined up, and many are aligned with Sunnis.

Katrina showed how unprepared we are here at home. Much money to rebuild Iraq is just sitting there because of the violence. It is an emotional thing, and sometimes a partisan thing, but you just have to look at the facts. I believe some 60% or more of the American people believe the war was a mistake? We are no minority here. No one is criticizing the troops.

Marthatex
09-30-2005, 10:50 AM
IMO it is not Cindy that tore our country apart.

tybee204
09-30-2005, 11:23 AM
Personal attacks on Websleuths members is a violation of WS TOS. Please edit attacks and take the opinions it to the Political Pavillion.

tybee

Jeana (DP)
09-30-2005, 12:30 PM
Blessed be our service people now and all who have gone before. They need our love and support, not our criticism.


Thank goodness you're here!! I was starting to get an itch from all the sheep.

lisag
09-30-2005, 12:51 PM
Personal attacks on Websleuths members is a violation of WS TOS. Please edit attacks and take the opinions it to the Political Pavillion.

tybee

I knew there was a reason I stayed away from this thread.... whew!!

Marthatex
09-30-2005, 02:31 PM
It is the Sunnis who are now posing the threat to peace in Iraq. They do not want to be dominated by the majority, even though the Shiites have given them assurances. They have condoned killing of innocents, as in teachers and children last week and this week.

Either Iraqis want Democracy, or they don't, and they will show it in the next few months. The next months will be crucial to Iraq; and it is indeed up to the Iraqis not us anymore.

We are mostly occupiers and trainers now, and the sooner we can get a large number of troops home the better.

Edited to add: We should ALL, be praying, both Democrats and Republicans, for an adoption of the Constitution in Iraq and that the Sunnis stand up for an end to the violence. That is what will start to bring home our troops.

Ntegrity
09-30-2005, 02:56 PM
We should ALL, be praying, both Democrats and Republicans, for an adoption of the Constitution in Iraq and that the Sunnis stand up for an end to the violence. That is what will start to bring home our troops.
:clap: :clap: :clap:
I saw a picture yesterday on CNN's website showing young children applauding one of our military vehicles damaged by a roadside bomb. I was disgusted. They need to decide as a people what they want. War or peace. They also need to quit teaching their children to HATE everyone who isn't like them. Otherwise, we need to get the heck out of Dodge. The Arabs have been at war amongst themselves for so many years I'm not sure they know any other way to live.

Marthatex
09-30-2005, 03:07 PM
I agree. there's alot more to it than just "killing the terrorists ''.

JDB
09-30-2005, 03:29 PM
Our country was being torn apart long before Cindy Sheehan came along. The reason for that is George W. Bush.
OHHH Lets go back farther then GWB. Lets go back to Clinton. Now from I have read he knew where Bin Laden was and did NOTHING.ANd lets not lay all the blame on Bush. Seems to me if the congress and Senate thought he was not doing hisjob they would ask for an Impeachment hearing AKA Clinton.
ANd Cindy Sheehan is nothing more then a Publicity MONGER.. And I happen to agree with ember what Sheehan has done is a disgarce to her own son.

deanws
09-30-2005, 04:02 PM
Ok I will accept that. But also please keep in mind how many people died on 9/11 because we knew there was a threat before BUSH but we sat on our hands doing nothing.:clap: Exactly:clap:

deanws
09-30-2005, 04:07 PM
stay gone...alas, it is just not to be...

This is my very first post, though I have lurked a while. I had to weigh in on this one.

I would like to know how you know that the threat was not from Iraq. Do you have inside knowledge? Please do not believe everything that has been "thoroughly investigated". I work for the gov't. Trust me on this one.

Saddam was madman without a soul who slayed his own people by the thousands & already hated us for what the first Bush admin did to his dictatorship. Given the chance, he would have volleyed. It is just too bad Bush Sr. didn't have the backing that Bush Jr. has to see it through. Iraq is an absolute threat. Isn't Al-Zarqawi now Bin Laden's right hand man? Al-Qaeda in IRAQ? Behead a few innocent contractors and become the golden child to Bin Laden? Maybe Bush did jump the gun on Iraq as a son's favor, but I believe he was on the right track. A terrorist is a terrorist no matter where they call home and they HATE us and our freedom. Believe that.

The smiling Cindy Sheehan being led off by police made me ill. She IS making a mockery of her son's service. He VOLUNTEERED and loved his country. DIED for it. He knew the risks. Maybe to him, the job rewards were compensation enough. In his job there, he FREED people. People who will vote. Just like our soliders did in Afghanistan. Soon these people will vote. VOTE! I know we take it for granted, but to them...wow...it is life altering. 50% of these voters are women. Women who never had a voice before. It really is profound when you think about it. I hope the Afghan & Iraqi women use there new found rights better than one liberator's mother has. Ironic that Cindy uses the same rights given to her by men & women, like her son, who have given their lives, so that she can stand on her righteous soap box and say it is all for naught. That just disgusts me.

I'm far from a warmonger. I value life, all life. But I'm no dummy either. If we cut & run now, we empower those blood-thirsty,third-world, insane religious extremists. I don't know about you guys, but I don't want that element over here on our own soil. Americans are NOT quitters.

We have service people fighting terror all over the world, not just in Iraq. Kosovo, Bosnia, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan to name a few. This is not a game folks. Our guys and gals who are serving are in real danger to keep us safe.

Blessed be our service people now and all who have gone before. They need our love and support, not our criticism.Great post ember.

KrazyKollector
09-30-2005, 05:55 PM
IMO it is not Cindy that tore our country apart.That's true. There's Michael Moore, Howard Dean, Teddy Kennedy, Hillary Clinton, Babs Streisand, Sean Penn, Al Gore, Dixie Chucks, Dan Rather.....
EDITED TO ADD--members of both parties have used the war to put themselves in the spotlight.

Does anyone have a "real" link to the news story that Cindy is now charging to appear and talk? It says she needs to pay her bills and that she said her son's life insurance is almost gone so she needs $$$. I believe she has gotten quite a bit of $$$$$$$ from all the left wingers who were using her.? Gee, nothing like capitalizing on your son's death and using it as a springboard to a new career. Makes one wonder what her original motives really were.

As for the war in Iraq. If you think the President lied, than Clinton and Kennedy and most of the left wingers and liberals also lied. Remember, Clinton also bombed Iraq and if he hadn't bungled it by hitting an asprin factory, might have bombed it a few more times. The terrorists got brave when Clinton was in office because he cut bait and ran when the going got tough, just like Somalia.

KrazyKollector
09-30-2005, 05:57 PM
I know we usually do not agree in the political world but I must say,
:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: and :blowkiss: for a wonderful post.



It is the Sunnis who are now posing the threat to peace in Iraq. They do not want to be dominated by the majority, even though the Shiites have given them assurances. They have condoned killing of innocents, as in teachers and children last week and this week.

Either Iraqis want Democracy, or they don't, and they will show it in the next few months. The next months will be crucial to Iraq; and it is indeed up to the Iraqis not us anymore.

We are mostly occupiers and trainers now, and the sooner we can get a large number of troops home the better.

Edited to add: We should ALL, be praying, both Democrats and Republicans, for an adoption of the Constitution in Iraq and that the Sunnis stand up for an end to the violence. That is what will start to bring home our troops.

KrazyKollector
09-30-2005, 06:03 PM
stay gone...alas, it is just not to be...

This is my very first post, though I have lurked a while. I had to weigh in on this one.

I would like to know how you know that the threat was not from Iraq. Do you have inside knowledge? Please do not believe everything that has been "thoroughly investigated". I work for the gov't. Trust me on this one.

Saddam was madman without a soul who slayed his own people by the thousands & already hated us for what the first Bush admin did to his dictatorship. Given the chance, he would have volleyed. It is just too bad Bush Sr. didn't have the backing that Bush Jr. has to see it through. Iraq is an absolute threat. Isn't Al-Zarqawi now Bin Laden's right hand man? Al-Qaeda in IRAQ? Behead a few innocent contractors and become the golden child to Bin Laden? Maybe Bush did jump the gun on Iraq as a son's favor, but I believe he was on the right track. A terrorist is a terrorist no matter where they call home and they HATE us and our freedom. Believe that.

The smiling Cindy Sheehan being led off by police made me ill. She IS making a mockery of her son's service. He VOLUNTEERED and loved his country. DIED for it. He knew the risks. Maybe to him, the job rewards were compensation enough. In his job there, he FREED people. People who will vote. Just like our soliders did in Afghanistan. Soon these people will vote. VOTE! I know we take it for granted, but to them...wow...it is life altering. 50% of these voters are women. Women who never had a voice before. It really is profound when you think about it. I hope the Afghan & Iraqi women use there new found rights better than one liberator's mother has. Ironic that Cindy uses the same rights given to her by men & women, like her son, who have given their lives, so that she can stand on her righteous soap box and say it is all for naught. That just disgusts me.

I'm far from a warmonger. I value life, all life. But I'm no dummy either. If we cut & run now, we empower those blood-thirsty,third-world, insane religious extremists. I don't know about you guys, but I don't want that element over here on our own soil. Americans are NOT quitters.

We have service people fighting terror all over the world, not just in Iraq. Kosovo, Bosnia, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan to name a few. This is not a game folks. Our guys and gals who are serving are in real danger to keep us safe.

Blessed be our service people now and all who have gone before. They need our love and support, not our criticism.:clap: :clap: :clap: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo:
:blowkiss: :blowkiss: :blowkiss:

Marthatex
09-30-2005, 09:08 PM
According to Snopes, the assertion that Clinton did not track down the perpetrators of terrorist attacks against Americans is false.

Many times the FBI was not allowed to question them, as in Saudi Arabia and Yemen.

He did not bomb Iraq, but our missiles missed Osama bin Laden by several hours. He was widely criticized at that time for trying to distract from the Monica Lewinski thing. And I remember it.

Condi and Bush were equally lax at the beginning of his administration.

http://www.snopes.com/rumors/clinton.htm

SandyBee
09-30-2005, 11:54 PM
stay gone...alas, it is just not to be...

This is my very first post, though I have lurked a while. I had to weigh in on this one.

I would like to know how you know that the threat was not from Iraq. Do you have inside knowledge? Please do not believe everything that has been "thoroughly investigated". I work for the gov't. Trust me on this one.

Saddam was madman without a soul who slayed his own people by the thousands & already hated us for what the first Bush admin did to his dictatorship. Given the chance, he would have volleyed. It is just too bad Bush Sr. didn't have the backing that Bush Jr. has to see it through. Iraq is an absolute threat. Isn't Al-Zarqawi now Bin Laden's right hand man? Al-Qaeda in IRAQ? Behead a few innocent contractors and become the golden child to Bin Laden? Maybe Bush did jump the gun on Iraq as a son's favor, but I believe he was on the right track. A terrorist is a terrorist no matter where they call home and they HATE us and our freedom. Believe that.

The smiling Cindy Sheehan being led off by police made me ill. She IS making a mockery of her son's service. He VOLUNTEERED and loved his country. DIED for it. He knew the risks. Maybe to him, the job rewards were compensation enough. In his job there, he FREED people. People who will vote. Just like our soliders did in Afghanistan. Soon these people will vote. VOTE! I know we take it for granted, but to them...wow...it is life altering. 50% of these voters are women. Women who never had a voice before. It really is profound when you think about it. I hope the Afghan & Iraqi women use there new found rights better than one liberator's mother has. Ironic that Cindy uses the same rights given to her by men & women, like her son, who have given their lives, so that she can stand on her righteous soap box and say it is all for naught. That just disgusts me.

I'm far from a warmonger. I value life, all life. But I'm no dummy either. If we cut & run now, we empower those blood-thirsty,third-world, insane religious extremists. I don't know about you guys, but I don't want that element over here on our own soil. Americans are NOT quitters.

We have service people fighting terror all over the world, not just in Iraq. Kosovo, Bosnia, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan to name a few. This is not a game folks. Our guys and gals who are serving are in real danger to keep us safe.

Blessed be our service people now and all who have gone before. They need our love and support, not our criticism.




:clap: :clap: Great post! I agree with you 110%. :)

ember
10-01-2005, 03:37 PM
Thanks to all who have welcomed me so warmly and/or agreed with my post.
To those who didn't, I absolutely respect your opinion. Not everyone is going to agree on politics. But if we did...oh what a beautiful world it would be!

I do have to question why anyone on this earth would think this all started with GWB. I don't know how to say this any nicer so I will say it the way I feel it...that is just pure ignorance of history. I'm going to copy something here that was sent to me in an email ages ago. Of course, I forwarded it. I can't put the source on here of who it is from because I'm afraid that would reveal too much of my personal information on the web...I'm leary of that. I know this to be true and so will you when you read it. If you do doubt it though, maybe "snopes" will be able to give it credit. It is a wonderful sight for seperating fact from fiction. So here you go. Tell me what you think...I know you all will, lol...

-Subject: Fwd: ANY ONE REMEMBER THIS?
>
> Does Anyone remember this??
>
> It was 1987! At a lecture the other day they were playing an
old
>news video of Lt.Col. Oliver North testifying at the Iran-Contra
hearings
>during the Reagan Administration.
>
> There was Ollie in front of God and country getting the third
>degree, but what he said was stunning!
>
> He was being drilled by a senator; "Did you not recently spend
close
>to $60,000 for a home security system?"
>
> Ollie replied, "Yes, I did, Sir."
>
> The senator continued, trying to get a laugh out of the
audience,
>"Isn't that just a little excessive?"
>
> "No, sir," continued Ollie.
>
> "No? And why not?" the senator asked.
>
> "Because the lives of my family and I were threatened, sir."
>
> "Threatened? By whom?" the senator questioned.
>
> "By a terrorist, sir" Ollie answered.
>
> "Terrorist? What terrorist could possibly scare you that much?"
>
> "His name is Osama bin Laden, sir" Ollie replied.
>
> At this point the senator tried to repeat the name, but
couldn't
>pronounce it, which most people back then probably couldn't. A couple
of
>people laughed at the attempt. Then the senator continued. Why are you
so
>afraid of this man?" the senator asked.
>
> "Because, sir, he is the most evil person alive that I know
of",
>Ollie answered.
>
> "And what do you recommend we do about him?" asked the senator.
>
> "Well, sir, if it was up to me, I would recommend that an
assassin
>team be formed to eliminate him and his men from the face of the
earth."
>
> The senator disagreed with this approach, and that was all that
was
>shown of the clip.
>
>
> By the way, that senator was Al Gore
>
> Also:
>
> Terrorist pilot Mohammad Atta blew up a bus in Israel in 1986.
The
>Israelis captured, tried and imprisoned him. As part of the Oslo
agreement
>with the Palestinians in 1993, Israel had to agree to release
so-called
>"political prisoners."
>
> However, the Israelis would not release any with blood on their
>hands, The American President at the time, Bill Clinton, and his
Secretary
>of State, Warren Christopher, "insisted" that all prisoners be
released.
>
> Thus Mohammad Atta was freed and eventually thanked the US by
flying
>an airplane into Tower One of the World Trade Center. This was
reported by
>many of the American TV networks at the time that the terrorists were
first
>identified. It was censored in the US from all later reports.
>
> If you agree that the American public must be made aware of
this
>fact, pass this on.
>

tybee204
10-01-2005, 03:43 PM
http://truthminers.com/hoaxarticles/oliver_north.htm

Oliver North Named Osama bin Laden as a Feared Terrorist During 1987 Iran/Contra Hearings While Being Questioned By a Disgusted Al Gore - NOT TRUE.[SIZE=3]

The message circulating on the internet claims that Oliver North named Osama bin Laden as a terrorist during the 1987 Iran Contra hearings. It further claims that Al Gore was questioning North and was not pleased with some of his answers.

The truth of the matter is that it wasn't Osma bin Laden that Oliver North named during the 1987 hearings. bin Laden had not yet developed his real hatred for America yet and in fact, was a friend of the U.S. when Afghanistan was fighting the Soviets. Oliver North named Palestinian terrorist Abu Nidal as the terrorist that caused him to accept as a gift, a home security system. The senator questioning him and expressing his disagreement was NOT Al Gore. Gore was not a member of the United States Senate Select Committee on Secret Military Assistance to Iran and the Nicaraguan Opposition and therefore did not take part in the questioning of any witnesses before the Committee. According to Oliver North, the person questioning him was committee counsel John Nields, not a senator. The allegation that the name Osama bin Laden is hard to pronounce is rather silly and, I suppose intended to make Gore look like an idiot. It is certainly not a difficult name. If one saw it in print, one might pronounce Laden with an a sound instead of an "ah", but the rest is easy. According to the message, the person questioning him had only heard the name, and then, only once. If there would have been any difficulty repeating it, it would have been for that reason, and not that it is hard to pronounce. Mr. North also says that he did not say he was afraid of Abu Nidal, but he was concerned for the safety of his family. The entire article that Mr. North wrote to refute this hoax is shown below.

tybee204
10-01-2005, 03:45 PM
http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/o/ollienorth-osama.htm

Oliver North Warned of the Terrorism of Osama Bin Laden during the Iran-Contra Hearings in 1987-Fiction!

Summary of eRumor:
Oliver North allegedly told a congressional hearing that he had installed a security system in his home because of threats to his family by Osama Bin Laden. Later versions of the story say the person questioning Col. North was Senator Al Gore.


The Truth:
According to the Congressional Record, there was no mention of Osama Bin Laden during the Iran-Contra hearings by Oliver North or anyone else. In fact, there was no mention of Osama Bin Laden in the Congressional Record at all in 1987, the year of the hearings.

Also, Senator Al Gore was not a member of the joint House-Senate Iran-Contra Committee and did not do any of the questioning.

One of the charges against North at that time, however, was his accepting a security system for his home as a gift. He said he needed it because of threats against himself and his family by Palestinian terrorist Abu Nidal.

Paul Bedard whose column WASHINGTON WHISPERS appears on USNEWS.com contacted North who confirmed that he never referenced Bin Laden who, in fact, became a friend of the U.S. against Soviet invaders of Afghanistan.

tybee204
10-01-2005, 03:46 PM
http://www.snopes.com/rumors/north.htm

And proved to be fiction on Snopes as well

tybee204
10-01-2005, 03:48 PM
And regarding Muhammad Atta FICTION

http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/h/hijacker.htm

The Pilot of One of the Hijacked 9/11 Airliners Was In Custody, but Released At President Reagan's Or President Clinton's -Fiction!

Summary of eRumor:
The email says that in 1986, a pilot named Atta was captured and imprisoned in Israel for blowing up a bus. As a part of the famous Oslo Accords, Israel was to release "political prisoners," but was reluctant to let any prisoners go free who had "blood on their hands." One version says it was at the insistence of President Ragan and Secretary of State George Shultz, Atta was freed. Another says it was insisted upon by Bill Clinton and Warren Christopher.


The Truth:
According to several news sources, including the Boston Globe, which was among those that originally published the story, this turned out to be a case of mistaken identity. An article from 9/19/01 says that Second Circuit Court of Appeals records showed that the man arrested in connection with the bus attack in Israel used an alias that was the same as the name of the hijacker, Mahmoud Atta. Even that suspect, however, was not in custody so where the story about Reagan the Oslo accords came from, we don't know. The Oslo accords were signed in 1993 and Ronald Reagan left office in 1989. Additionally, we've not been able to find any provisions in the Oslo accords as described. There were provisions for the release of a large number Palestinian prisoners.

The original version of the eRumor included the Reagan connection. Someone along the way decided to pin the blame on Bill Clinton and a new, revised version started circulating with his and Warren Christopher's names inserted

ember
10-01-2005, 03:52 PM
I stand corrected. :blushing:


Wow, though...I could have sworn on that one considering who it was sent from...:waitasec: ...just goes to show ya, huh. I never checked it out though on any of those site because I got it long before the internet was as mainstream as it is now. Thanks, Tybee. Sorry everyone.

I am humbled.

ember
10-01-2005, 03:53 PM
Boy...I'm making enemies here already & it's only my 8th post, lol

I heard that could happen...

tybee204
10-01-2005, 03:57 PM
LOL mass forwared emails generally prove to be false. I recieved that same one some years ago and had already checked it out.

JBean
10-01-2005, 03:58 PM
Boy...I'm making enemies here already & it's only my 8th post, lol

I heard that could happen...I don't know about enemies ember, but you are making friends .

tybee204
10-01-2005, 03:59 PM
BTW it couldnt have been pre Internet mainstream that the email started. It references 9/11 and Mohammad Atta. The Internet was pretty "mainstream by 9/11.

ember
10-01-2005, 04:03 PM
Well thanks for clearing that up...all of this time I believed that. I work with military and they believe it. Isn't it crazy what people will believe on trust...I better stop right there, cause that's opening up a whole other can of worms. :silenced:

I guess I'm looking pretty "ignorant of history" myself right now...:laugh: :slap:

But I still believe all of this started long before either Bush got in office... :snooty: , lol

And I still think Cindy Sheehan should try to find a better outlet for her grief and anger. A country, in my opinion, should work like good parents do...show a united front. Just my opinion!

tybee204
10-01-2005, 04:10 PM
LOL Maybe Ollie North can pay them a visit and set them straight on the facts.

FROM THE DESK OF LTCOL OLIVER L. NORTH (USMC) RET.
NOVEMBER 28, 2001



OVER THE COURSE OF THE LAST SEVERAL WEEKS, I HAVE RECEIVED SEVERAL THOUSAND E-MAILS FROM EVERY STATE IN THE U.S. AND 13 FOREIGN COUNTRIES IN WHICH THE ORIGINATOR PURPORTS TO HAVE RECENTLY VIEWED A VIDEOTAPE OF MY SWORN TESTIMONY BEFORE A CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE IN 1987.



A COPY OF ONE OF THOSE E-MAILS IS ATTACHED BELOW. AS YOU WILL NOTE, THE ORIGINATOR ATTRIBUTES TO ME CERTAIN STATEMENTS REGARDING USAMA BIN LADEN AND OTHER MATTERS THAT ARE SIMPLY INACCURATE. THOUGH I WOULD LIKE TO CLAIM THE GIFT OF PROPHESY, I DON'T HAVE IT.



I DON'T KNOW WHO SAW WHAT VIDEO "AT UNC." (OR ANYWHERE ELSE) BUT, FOR THE RECORD, HERE'S WHAT I DO KNOW:



1. IT WAS THE COMMITTEE COUNSEL, JOHN NIELDS, NOT A SENATOR WHO WAS DOING THE QUESTIONING.



2. THE SECURITY SYSTEM, INSTALLED AT MY HOME, JUST BEFORE I MADE A VERY SECRET TRIP TO TEHRAN, COST, ACCORDING TO THE COMMITTEE, $16K, NOT $60K.



3. THE TERRORIST WHO THREATENED TO KILL ME IN 1986, JUST BEFORE THAT SECRET TRIP TO TEHRAN, WAS NOT USAMA BIN LADEN, IT WAS ABU NIDAL (WHO WORKS FOR THE LIBYANS -- NOT THE TALIBAN AND NOT IN AFGHANISTAN).



4. I NEVER SAID I WAS AFRAID OF ANYBODY. I DID SAY THAT I WOULD BE GLAD TO MEET ABU NIDAL ON EQUAL TERMS ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD BUT THAT I WAS UNWILLING TO HAVE HIM OR HIS OPERATIVES MEET MY WIFE AND CHILDREN ON HIS TERMS.



5. I DID SAY THAT THE TERRORISTS INTERCEPTED BY THE FBI ON THE WAY TO MY HOUSE IN FEB. 87 TO KILL MY WIFE, CHILDREN AND ME WERE LIBYANS, DISPATCHED FROM THE PEOPLE'S COMMITTEE FOR LIBYAN STUDENTS IN MCLEAN, VIRGINIA.



6. AND I DID SAY THAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAD MOVED MY FAMILY OUT OF OUR HOME TO A MILITARY BASE (CAMP LEJEUNE, NC) UNTIL THEY COULD DISPATCH MORE THAN 30 AGENTS TO PROTECT MY FAMILY FROM THOSE TERRORISTS (BECAUSE A LIBERAL FEDERAL JUDGE HAD ALLOWED THE LYBIAN ASSASSINS TO POST BOND AND THEY FLED).



7. AND, FYI: THOSE FEDERAL AGENTS REMAINED AT OUR HOME UNTIL I RETIRED FROM THE MARINES AND WAS NO LONGER A "GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL." BY THEN, THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT HAD SPENT MORE THAN $2M PROTECTING THE NORTH FAMILY. THE TERRORISTS SENT TO KILL US WERE NEVER RE-APPREHENDED.



SEMPER FIDELIS,
OLIVER L. NORTH

ember
10-01-2005, 04:11 PM
BTW it couldnt have been pre Internet mainstream that the email started. It references 9/11 and Mohammad Atta. The Internet was pretty "mainstream by 9/11.

True, but not so much in my neck 'o the woods. We were able to use it for work related things and that's it. No checking out stuff on the web allowed.
I didn't have it at home until, oh say, last year.
Yes, I pretty much lived under a rock at that time, lol...

No really, I'm a nature girl... I love to be outside. We didn't have access here for the longest time and it didn't bother me. Too, I was afraid it would taint me some how...you know cause me to have less human contact and be a computer hermit like my brother, lol

Look at me now...:doh: :)

ember
10-01-2005, 04:12 PM
I don't know about enemies ember, but you are making friends .
Why, thank you...that's sweet...one can never have enough friends!

JDB
10-01-2005, 04:18 PM
Why, thank you...that's sweet...one can never have enough friends!
Hey anyone that have the guts to admit when wrong here. Is AOK in my book. I have to do it many times LAFFIN :blowkiss:

ember
10-01-2005, 04:21 PM
Hey anyone that have the guts to admit when wrong here. Is AOK in my book. I have to do it many times LAFFIN :blowkiss:

I try to be honest and live by a code. When I'm wrong...I admit it. But I'm not wrong too often, lol :innocent:

:blowkiss: back at ya

terminatrixator
10-01-2005, 07:46 PM
Many parents that lost Sons in Vietnam came to protest the the Vietnam War. They were labled grief stricken, unstable and unpatriotic as well.

When parents encourage and support their children volunteering for Military Service they put faith and trust in the Government to not play politics with the lives of Americans. This war has been shown repeatedly to have begun under false pretenses, false information and false claims to both the the American citizens and the World.


This war is like going back 40 years in history and repeating the same mistakes.

That faith and trust is at times proven to be misplaced.
The way I see it, ask many who have come back from the war, and saw the thousands upon thousands of mass graves. Saddam Hussein is now out of Power and his reign of terror is no more.

Government is politics, no matter if you are Independent, communist, Replublican or a Democrat. It's politics, no matter how you slice it. Our government is also about Freedom. The United States has an obligation to ensure freedom for its citizens and as the largest super power, it has a moral duty and obligation to stand against terrorism, genocide and the atrocities committed even in other countries. Yes, I know "Weapons of Mass Destruction" stuff, however, he was given warning time and time again, and to me, Saddam was a Weapon, along with Bin Laden, and I still believe they were in cahoots, in some way over 911.

I am not a war hungry person, but I believe this war was necessary and so do our troops, and I believe in standing behind the decision, out of respect for those that lost their lives, out of respect for our President, who was voted into office to make these decisions, and for the dignity of the people of Iraq.

I pray our men and women come home soon, and Iraq becomes stable to take care of their own.

God Bless the United States of America and our Freedoms.

Nova
10-01-2005, 09:02 PM
Who claimed Bush "started" problems in the Middle East? As far as I can tell, that argument is a straw man. I think everyone is aware that the Israeli/Palestinian conflicts, the hostage crisis in Iran, the first Gulf War, etc., etc., and so forth predated Bush and Clinton.

Bush is quite rightly blamed for (a) ignoring the evidence on Al Qaeda compiled by the previous administration; (b) manipulating the post-9/11 feelings of Americans and adding his own lies and distortions to "excuse" a war on Iraq; and (c) for mismanaging the war and even now, having no apparent exit strategy.

Though there is plenty of blame to be placed at the feet of Bush's predecessors, he and his administration get all the credit for the items in my previous paragraph.

concernedperson
10-01-2005, 09:06 PM
Who claimed Bush "started" problems in the Middle East? As far as I can tell, that argument is a straw man. I think everyone is aware that the Israeli/Palestinian conflicts, the hostage crisis in Iran, the first Gulf War, etc., etc., and so forth predated Bush and Clinton.

Bush is quite rightly blamed for (a) ignoring the evidence on Al Qaeda compiled by the previous administration; (b) manipulating the post-9/11 feelings of Americans and adding his own lies and distortions to "excuse" a war on Iraq; and (c) for mismanaging the war and even now, having no apparent exit strategy.

Though there is plenty of blame to be placed at the feet of Bush's predecessors, he and his administration get all the credit for the items in my previous paragraph.

He's the man. What more can I say?

Nova
10-01-2005, 09:12 PM
Let's sum up the attacks on Ms. Sheehan in this thread:

She is stark-raving mad.

She is overwhelmed by grief.

She isn't motivated by grief; she never loved her son at all.

She was a lousy mother.

She is a publicity hound.

She is a cold, calculating mercenary, only in it for the money.

In the face of this blizzard of ad hominem attacks (which come not just from WS posters, but from the administration and its sycophants at FNC), any thinking person has to suspect there is no valid defense against Ms. Sheehan's complaints.

Marthatex
10-02-2005, 01:16 PM
We were right to go into Afghanistan, where the Taliban ruled, and terrorist training camps were being held. I think we should have stuck with our original policy of "going after the terrorists where they are, the training camps, no matter what country they're in". After 9-11 we had the sympathy and cooperation of many countries on this. We should have kept at it.

The bombings yesterday in Bali, killing and wounding scores of innocent people, show that Al-Queda connected groups are alive and well.

Nova
10-02-2005, 03:46 PM
We were right to go into Afghanistan, where the Taliban ruled, and terrorist training camps were being held. I think we should have stuck with our original policy of "going after the terrorists where they are, the training camps, no matter what country they're in". After 9-11 we had the sympathy and cooperation of many countries on this. We should have kept at it.

The bombings yesterday in Bali, killing and wounding scores of innocent people, show that Al-Queda connected groups are alive and well.

Exactly, Martha. Lots of us who normally oppose military intervention overseas understood and supported the action in Afghanistan.

The war in Iraq has been something else entirely...

deanws
10-02-2005, 05:27 PM
I don't know about enemies ember, but you are making friends .I agree...welcome ember :angel:

ember
10-02-2005, 07:35 PM
I agree...welcome ember :angel:
Thank you too for a warm welcome. Everyone has been so nice, it feels good to be here. :)

Nova
10-02-2005, 10:24 PM
Thank you too for a warm welcome. Everyone has been so nice, it feels good to be here. :)

Ember, you are indeed welcome here.

Many of us disagree with one another quite vigorously, but regard our fellow posters very warmly all the same. I hope you enjoy WS.

Bobbisangel
10-03-2005, 03:36 AM
Actually THIS says it better than the family's press release. The woman's a narcissist. Perhaps some variant on Muchausen By Proxy. But whatever she is at that particular moment, it's neither grieving nor unhappy.



I don't think Cindy Sheehan is mentally ill, narcissist, or suffers from Muchausen by Proxy. IMO she is a mother that is grieving for her son and is lashing out at who/what she believes is at fault for his death. Nothing else.

It is my understanding that Casey Sheehan was a wonderful young man who chose to serve his country. A young man who re-enlisted after his first 3-4 years was up. I'm sure that this young man knew the risks of going to war and being involved. He made the choice to go. Even though Cindy had to have known the risk of Casey's chosen career deep down she probably never dreamed that he wouldn't be coming home.

While in Texas Cindy wanted President Bush to come and tell her why he killed her son. Does that sound rational? Did she really believe that President Bush was going to come and explain why he "killed her son?. She is blaming him because she has to blame someone right now. That is her grief talking.

I agree that there are groups who could care less about Casey Sheehan that are using Cindy. Cindy isn't thinking straight enough to see what is happening.
She believes that these groups are standing behind her.

I can't judge this woman to harshly. There but for the grace of God go I.
A child's death will either bring a husband and wife closer together or it will push them apart....something that my aunt told me after her little 6 yr old son drowned. I see that this is true all of the time. Cindy's marriage has fallen apart which is a shame. Parents really need each other at a time like this. They need to draw on each others strengths and be a support to each other.

I don't know how Casey Sheehan would feel if he knew what his mom is up to.
I only know what I have read about Casey and it seems that he was a fine soldier who loved his country and wanted to serve it. Hopefully he would understand his mother's grief and not judge her either.

Bobbisangel
10-03-2005, 04:10 AM
I believe that George Bush used tradgedy of September 11th, as an excuse to go after Saddam. He lied to the country about the WMDs in order to justify going to war. Now, we are in a big mess. He used to boast to Bin Laden "you can run but, you can't hide" Apparently, he misspoke, huh? He doen't even mention Bin Laden anymore.



Just because President Bush doesn't mention Bin Laden anymore doesn't mean that he isn't actively being hunted by our troops.

jannuncutt
10-03-2005, 08:56 AM
Just because President Bush doesn't mention Bin Laden anymore doesn't mean that he isn't actively being hunted by our troops.
Doesn't mean that he is, either.

Jeana (DP)
10-03-2005, 10:20 AM
Let's sum up the attacks on Ms. Sheehan in this thread:

She is overwhelmed by grief.



I don't see how this could be viewed as an attack, Nova.

ziggy
10-04-2005, 01:56 AM
Argh! Can't decide who I'm more fed up with and hoping their 15 minutes are up... Cindy or Omorrosa.

Nova
10-04-2005, 11:52 PM
I don't see how this could be viewed as an attack, Nova.

The attack is in the "overwhelmed" part. The implication is that she is deranged by her grief - as if a rational person can't see this war for the sham that it is.

(BTW, always nice to "see" you here, my friend.)