Soldiers mother in Bush protest

#1
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4141602.stm

The mother of a US soldier killed in Iraq, who is holding a roadside protest outside President Bush's Texas ranch, is gaining support from well-wishers.
Cindy Sheehan has received flowers and food from people who support her anti-war stance, and dozens have turned out to join her demonstration.

She is vowing to remain until she is allowed to speak to the president about his justification for the war.

Ms Sheehan's son Casey was killed in Baghdad's Sadr City in April 2004.
 
#2
Good spot PTP.

Well I wish her every success with this, but my gut feeling is that it will be a snowy day in hell before Condi or Andrew Card allow Dubya anywhere near her!
 
#3
Maybe she should run in the primaries against the Republican heir apparent , if she wants her voice heard on primetime? Worked for Reg Keys....
 
#4
PartTimePongo said:
Maybe she should run in the primaries against the Republican heir apparent , if she wants her voice heard on primetime? Worked for Reg Keys....
Well stranger things have happened, and without wishing to appear sarcastic, US politics is stranger than most. Cindy Sheehan's situation is generating a fair amount of interest stateside - much as Reg Keys' did here.

Here is but one example of that interest - an interview with Mrs Sheehan:

Casey Sheehan re-enlisted with the Army in August of 2003, knowing that his unit would eventually be deployed in Iraq. Casey, a Humvee mechanic with the 1st Calvary, was killed in Sadr City on April 4th of this year. He was only 24 years old. He is and forever will remain an American hero.

Casey’s mom, Cindy Sheehan, is a hero too. Angered that her son was sent to fight and die in an unjust war for reasons that have proven to be lies, Cindy is speaking out about the Iraq invasion. Cindy has joined other moms and families who have lost loved ones in the conflict to tell Americans about the true costs of the war. Their group, Real Voices (http://realvoices.org/rv/index.html), is running television ads featuring the voices of Americans like Cindy speaking directly to President Bush about the impact of his failed policies and lies.

We are honored to bring you our interview with Cindy Sheehan about her son Casey and why she decided to speak out about the Iraq war.
 
#5
It would actually appear that Mrs Sheehan and Dubya did meet in 2004...no wonder she wants a rematch - the transcript is truly baffling.
 
#6
Noticed this a few days ago on the micheal moore website (yuck.... it was research honest! :D )

she seems quite set to wait him out.

good luck to her...
 
#9
He was a volunteer not a draftee. His service would seem to be support of US policy, an act of patriotism. His mother on the other hand....
 

Mr_Fingerz

LE
Book Reviewer
#10
Firmly believes that his life was wasted in support of a lie.
 
#11
tomahawk6 said:
He was a volunteer not a draftee. His service would seem to be support of US policy, an act of patriotism. His mother on the other hand....
He (and his mother) was told by Bush that he was fighting to protect the U.S. from Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, and that invading Iraq would reduce the likelihood of further terrorist attacks. It was on the basis of that information that he chose to serve.

It now looks like such assertions were foolish at best, or downright deceitful at worst. Either way, I think his mother, and indeed every U.S. and U.K. citizen, has the right to some sort of answers.
 
#12
I have to agree with T6, he was a volunteer. Reg Keys, Fus Gentles family and the likes of this woman are quickly used by those with a political axe to grind. Protesting is never going to bring their children back their children volunteered for service not to pick and choose if the war is right or wrong.

Its very sad on many levels and pointless but encouraged and exploited by the likes of Michael Moore and that twat Damon Albarn or George Galloway.
 
#14
is it any wonder that the US lose so many troops to IEDs, this pic is of how they pack their troops into vehicles on patrol:




'Exclusive CNN image show U.S. troops in tanks and Bradley fighting vehicles in Tal Afar on Tuesday'.
Not showing much of a 'duty of care'.
 
#15
Its so sad, Bush will not go to one funeral or recieve one of the coffins back off the planes, but he will ignore this poor lady and sweep on by, arrogant as these politicians are once they have got their second term and no longer have any votes to chase, cynical view i am sorry but there we are!
They use all sorts of excuses, security, being busy etc to make sure that a simple wish of a mother who lost her boy is not fulfuilled. I have not seen any of the big wigs over there loose a son or daughter, much less actually send a son or daughter out there to join up or serve? I dont like Michael Moore's style, i dont like his journalism, but he is the only one in the big time US media who has spoken out and quantified and looked deeper in to the Bush Regime and its almost cold and calous disregard for the almost 1900 US dead since "mission accomplished" was declared by Bush on that Air Craft carrier! The small mid west towns have paid the bulk of the price(reservisits killed) along with with the inner city deprived areas loosing most of the reg troops killed..... what can we do, offer support to this lady and hope she has her wish to speak to the leader of her country who, the commander in chief who sent her boy to fight and die.
 
#16
tomahawk6 said:
He was a volunteer not a draftee. His service would seem to be support of US policy, an act of patriotism. His mother on the other hand....
So she uses her Constitutional rights to say what she thinks - rights her boy died to uphold - and she's a traitor ? Or is disagreeing with US policy automatically treason nowadays ? I always thought policy was decided by the people and that debate about it was the cornerstone of the democratic process - idealist that I am.
 
#17
I would imagine most are by now aware of the "Clash of Civilizations" thesis put forth by Samuel Huntington, that is given so much credence by neo-cons and disdained by liberals? Here's his take on fascism in his 1956 work, "The Soldier and the State" (pp. 91-92).

The military ethic and fascism are similar in some respects but they have one fundamental difference. What the military man accepts as the facts of existence to be wrestled with as effectively as possible, the fascist glorifies as the supreme values of existence. The military man sees struggle inherent in human relations; the fascist glorifies the struggle as the highest activity of man. The military ethic accepts the nation state as an independent unit; fascism hails the state or the party as the embodiment of moral virtue, the ultimate source of morality. While military thinking accepts war, fascist thinking romanticises war and violence. The military man recognizes the necessity and uses of power; the fascist worships power as an end in itself. The military ethic recognizes the necessity of leadership and discipline in human society; fascism emphasizes the supreme power and ability of the leader, and the absolute subordination to his will.

The fascist and the military views on human nature and history differ widely. In opposition to military emphasis upon the universality of human traits, the fascist believes in the natural superiority of a chosen people or race and the inherent genius and supreme virtue of the leader. Military thinking, on the other hand is skeptical of everybody. While the military man learns from history and the liberal relies on reason, the fascist stresses intuition. He has little need for ordered knowledge and practical, empirical realism. He celebrates the triumph of the Will over external obstacles. In this respect fascism is more individualistic than liberalism and more removed from the military ethic with its emphasis upon the limitations of human nature.

Unlike liberalism, fascism willingly supports the maintenance of strong military forces. While the liberal will fights for ideals and the military man for the security of the state, the fascist fights in order to fight. War is the end not the instrument of politics. In contrast to the more cautious, unbelligerent foreign policy of the military man, the fascist advocates a dynamic, aggressive, revolutionary policy with the avowed aims of conflict and the expansion of the power of the state to its ultimate limit. The fascist believes in the internal subordination of all other social institutions to the state or party.
T6 will probably burst a blood vessel, but I think it might spark an interesting debate.
 
#18
Filbert Fox said:
is it any wonder that the US lose so many troops to IEDs, this pic is of how they pack their troops into vehicles on patrol:




'Exclusive CNN image show U.S. troops in tanks and Bradley fighting vehicles in Tal Afar on Tuesday'.
Not showing much of a 'duty of care'.
Spotter hat on: That's not a Bradley, it's an M113. Seems CNN are getting their vehicle recognition training from the USAF.
 
#20
PluckyBrit said:
tomahawk6 said:
He was a volunteer not a draftee. His service would seem to be support of US policy, an act of patriotism. His mother on the other hand....
He (and his mother) was told by Bush that he was fighting to protect the U.S. from Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, and that invading Iraq would reduce the likelihood of further terrorist attacks. It was on the basis of that information that he chose to serve.

It now looks like such assertions were foolish at best, or downright deceitful at worst. Either way, I think his mother, and indeed every U.S. and U.K. citizen, has the right to some sort of answers.
Luckily for millions of free Iraqis, his irrational and grief-stricken mother isn't in charge of US foreign policy, neither does she presume to second guess their decisions as adults.

And where exactly did GB say the USA was at risk from WMD?
 

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top