NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N16165034.htm

Last night a pickup truck dragging chains ran over the rows of white crosses on the side of the road next to Cindy Sheehan's vigil in Crawford, Texas. And you probably already saw the news yesterday about President Bush's neighbor firing a shotgun into the air trying to scare the mothers of fallen soldiers who have gathered around Cindy.

Cindy and the other moms in Crawford have vowed to stay, and now a neighboring rancher, who is a veteran, has offered them some of his nearby land if they need it.

It's sad that people get so hostile towards someone expressing their opinion.

Nice, show how upset you are at the protesters by running over crosses placed there in memory of dead soldiers. Great idea! :rolleyes:

Those crosses were dishonouring the memories of the fallen, so, they MUST be desicrated in order for their memories to be preserved in the purest form. Because, after all, these nut jobs are rendering the deaths worthless with their pandering vigils... :rolleyes:

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N16165034.htm

Last night a pickup truck dragging chains ran over the rows of white crosses on the side of the road next to Cindy Sheehan's vigil in Crawford, Texas. And you probably already saw the news yesterday about President Bush's neighbor firing a shotgun into the air trying to scare the mothers of fallen soldiers who have gathered around Cindy.

Cindy and the other moms in Crawford have vowed to stay, and now a neighboring rancher, who is a veteran, has offered them some of his nearby land if they need it.

It's sad that people get so hostile towards someone expressing their opinion.
The guy firing the shotgun didn't break any laws. Think of it as his legally protected right to protest against the protestors who have gathered on the edge of his land.

I wonder why someone would vandalize crosses honoring the fallen soldiers. Aren't the people pissed off at Cindy the ones claiming to care the most about these soldiers?

I wonder why someone would vandalize crosses honoring the fallen soldiers. Aren't the people pissed off at Cindy the ones claiming to care the most about these soldiers?



They most likely view those crosses as a travesty, as opposed to the crosses that actually represent fallen soldiers in a cemetary.

The guy firing the shotgun didn't break any laws. Think of it as his legally protected right to protest against the protestors who have gathered on the edge of his land.

I'm not saying he did break any laws.

They most likely view those crosses as a travesty, as opposed to the crosses that actually represent fallen soldiers in a cemetary.
So, they oppose the symbolism that the crosses are holding?

They most likely view those crosses as a travesty, as opposed to the crosses that actually represent fallen soldiers in a cemetary.

So you support what they did?

I'm not saying he did break any laws.
I know, sorry, it just seemed to me that you were saying he was doing something he shouldn't.

So you support what they did?

"I am more representative than thou!"

They most likely view those crosses as a travesty, as opposed to the crosses that actually represent fallen soldiers in a cemetary.


Also, there can't be more than one cross to honor someone? How is it a travesty exactly?

A pickup truck ran over wooden crosses

Wow, symbolically showing that pickup trucks > Jesus.

Way to go, that'll stop those pesky anti-war activists!

So you support what they did?



Oh my goodness! Why do people always assume I support the actions of others, when I'm only saying that I can see both sides of the issue!? No, I do not support destruction of crosses!

"I am more representative than thou!"


Go away.

I know, sorry, it just seemed to me that you were saying he was doing something he shouldn't.

I was just pointing out, what looks to me like, violent aggression from those that claim to be the moral ones.

Oh my goodness! Why do people always assume I support the actions of others, when I'm only saying that I can see both sides of the issue!? No, I do not support destruction of crosses!

Ok it's good that you don't. I don't see how the crosses can be a travesty, can you explain that to me?

Ok it's good that you don't. I don't see how the crosses can be a travesty, can you explain that to me?



Well, they probably see them as representing politicized altruism, which would probably be contrary to the true desires of her son which would (I'm guessing here) be to protect the country and do his duty, no matter whether he agreed with the war or not.

I bet they come back dressed in white sheets like ghosts and try to scare the moms away

Well, they probably see them as representing politicized altruism, which would probably be contrary to the true desires of her son which would (I'm guessing here) be to protect the country and do his duty, no matter whether he agreed with the war or not.
But how do they know what her son wanted?

I bet they come back dressed in white sheets like ghosts and try to scare the moms away
If I see a bunch of rednecks in a pickup truck wearing sheets "ghost" isn't the first thing that pops into my head.

If I see a bunch of rednecks in a pickup truck wearing sheets "ghost" isn't the first thing that pops into my head.
Then you just missed the joke

Then you just missed the joke
sorry

But how do they know what her son wanted?



We can assume that, as he volunteered to join the military, swore an oath, and gave the implication that he believed it, he did. It's not a 100% certainty, but it indubitably leans in that directions.

We can assume that, as he volunteered to join the military, swore an oath, and gave the implication that he believed it, he did. It's not a 100% certainty, but it indubitably leans in that directions.
That is very true. I grant you that.

But, even so, these people who knocked over the cross should've had respect for the symbolism of the crosses; the memory of each of the fallen that they represented.

I wonder why someone would vandalize crosses honoring the fallen soldiers. Aren't the people pissed off at Cindy the ones claiming to care the most about these soldiers?
The problem is that those crosses weren't placed there to "honor" any soldiers. They were placed there to call attention to the protest. If they represented any actual fallen soldiers, the poor guys are probably rolling over in their graves. I know I would! :mad: :headbang: :mad:

The problem is that those crosses weren't placed there to "honor" any soldiers. They were placed there to call attention to the protest. If they represented any actual fallen soldiers, the poor guys are probably rolling over in their graves. I know I would! :mad: :headbang: :mad:

Oh noes! My mom wants my president to explain to her why he said he wouldn't use the memory of fallen soldiers for political gain and then turned around and did it anyway! How dare she expect my commander-in-chief to do what he says he will!!!! A citizen of my country standing up for what they believe in and expecting their elected representatives to account for their actions is sooooo unpatriotic!

The problem is that those crosses weren't placed there to "honor" any soldiers. They were placed there to call attention to the protest. If they represented any actual fallen soldiers, the poor guys are probably rolling over in their graves. I know I would! :mad: :headbang: :mad:

The fallen soldiers would be angry that their parents are putting up crosses in their name? THey would be angry that their mothers are greif stricken at losing their sons to a war that they don't agree with?

I have to wonder... do you agree with the vandalization of the crosses? How can you be so sure exactly what is in the hearts and minds of the people who put up those crosses? Why is it so impossible for the people against the war to be genuinely concerned with the lives of family and friends that have gone to or died in the war?

The mothers didn't take an oath to the army to be okay with the Govt sending their kids off to die in what thye felt was a senseless war did they? DOn't they have a right to question their govt? Don't they have a right to speak their mind in a peaceful way?

Oh noes! My mom wants my president to explain to her why he said he wouldn't use the memory of fallen soldiers for political gain and then turned around and did it anyway! How dare she expect my commander-in-chief to do what he says he will!!!! A citizen of my country standing up for what they believe in and expecting their elected representatives to account for their actions is sooooo unpatriotic!
That can't be right. Bush couldn't have said one thing then proceeded to do another. Kerry was supposed to be the flip-flopper.

The problem is that those crosses weren't placed there to "honor" any soldiers. They were placed there to call attention to the protest. If they represented any actual fallen soldiers, the poor guys are probably rolling over in their graves. I know I would! :mad: :headbang: :mad:

exactly. to use the crosses as a politcal tool is wrong. it doesnt memorialize those dead soldiers. it makes a political statement.

and its a political statement that few of those soldiers would want made over their deaths. were their families consulted as to whether or not they approved of their loved ones being used in this way?

i dont really blame the guy for knocking down the crosses. it must be annoying enough when the president is in town, what with the secret service all over the place. the extra protestors (i think there are always protestors in crawford when the president is in residence) must just make them nuts.

The problem is that those crosses weren't placed there to "honor" any soldiers. They were placed there to call attention to the protest. If they represented any actual fallen soldiers, the poor guys are probably rolling over in their graves. I know I would! :mad: :headbang: :mad:
You're grave would be already well enough disturbed from you going zombie and trying to go to wal-mart to kill "liberals"

ok lets keep this civil and not get the thread locked

I do think it is a bit of a double standard to support a president that used the deaths of many people (9/11) for political reasons (going to war with Iraq) while having utter contempt for a mother who is greiving over her son and is using his death as a way to stop people from dying in a war she doesnt agree with.

Would those people who died on that day from the terrorist attack appreciate having the memory of their death used to attack a nation that had nothing to do with their deaths?

I do think it is a bit of a double standard to support a president that used the deaths of many people (9/11) for political reasons (going to war with Iraq) while having utter contempt for a mother who is greiving over her son and is using his death as a way to stop people from dying in a war she doesnt agree with.

Would those people who died on that day from the terrorist attack appreciate having the memory of their death used to attack a nation that had nothing to do with their deaths?
The fact that she's a mother does not insulate her from being properly criticised for dishonoring her own son's memory. Nothing can change that ... nothing! :mad: :headbang:

You're grave would be already well enough disturbed from you going zombie and trying to go to wal-mart to kill "liberals"

Keep it civil. No need for responses like this.

The problem is that those crosses weren't placed there to "honor" any soldiers. They were placed there to call attention to the protest. If they represented any actual fallen soldiers, the poor guys are probably rolling over in their graves. I know I would! :mad: :headbang: :mad:

Yes, how dare she honor the memory of her son how she sees fit. ::rolls eyes::

The fact that she's a mother does not insulate her from being properly criticised for dishonoring her own son's memory. Nothing can change that ... nothing! :mad: :headbang:


Her dishonoring her sons memory is all in your head. Very subjective indeed. What insulates Bush from the same utter contempt that you are showing for this mother, for having done something similar but much worse. Perhaps soldiers are worth more in your eyes than civilians?

Also, nice job glossing over all the questions I asked.

The fact that she's a mother does not insulate her from being properly criticised for dishonoring her own son's memory. Nothing can change that ... nothing! :mad: :headbang:

I fail to see how she is "dishonoring" her son's memory. And if she is, I fail to see how it is any different then Bush doing the same thing with the people who died in 9/11.

Keep it civil. No need for responses like this.
I guess you didn't read the "Lets all go work for Wal-mart" thread. If anyone would go zombie on liberals, it would be Eutrusca, and since everyone will be going to Wal-mart, that is where he will find them, obviously.

Though hopefully it isn't a Wal-mart where they sell guns, because shotguns > zombies

I guess you didn't read the "Lets all go work for Wal-mart" thread. If anyone would go zombie on liberals, it would be Eutrusca, and since everyoen will be going to Wal-mart, that is where he will find them, obviously.

No I have to call BS on that. Eutrusca can have his annoying aspects (hell I know I do) but to go zombie on somebody he doesn't like? Not going to happen.

This thread is not about Wal-Mart or zombies! :(

This thread is not about Wal-Mart or zombies! :(
It is about rednecks hauling chains over crosses. Like I said, I'm waiting for the ghost impressions

Truly this man driving the pick-up was the messiah! He was afterall from Waco, Texas...sorry some one had to...too easy

No answer Eut?

Its not clear to me what Cindy Sheehan's true intentions are, but its safe to say at the very least, she is a distraught mother who has lost her son. Not matter what the circumstances of his death are, this is still a terrible loss,not matter wether you can justify it or not.
I dont know if she is being used. I dont know if she has an agenda here. I dont know whose responsible for destroying the crosses.

I do know it looks like a game of up the ante and I dont like where its going.

At the very least, we'll see a book or movie made on this.

That was wrong, one of those chains could have hit someone, I could see it now. "Anti War protester murdered by Anti Protesters!"

I'm waiting for the Next Civil War, if this keeps up it'll happen. And personally I'm looking forward to it.

That was wrong, one of those chains could have hit someone, I could see it now. "Anti War protester murdered by Anti Protesters!"

I'm waiting for the Next Civil War, if this keeps up it'll happen. And personally I'm looking forward to it.


It was wrong even if noone was in danger (which I don't think they were because they woulda played that up big time). Vandalizing something because you disagree with it is never a way to go.

and vandalizing something that is not your property is a crime. I hope that they catch and punish whoever did it.

If the situation was reversed and an Anti-War protestor drove over crosses put out by Pro-War grieving mothers, there would be raging rants about how they were going to be thrown into the lowest pit of hell. Apparently, though, God only cares about you if you support the Iraq war.

and vandalizing something that is not your property is a crime. I hope that they catch and punish whoever did it.

They did catch him. I think it only took them about 45 minutes, and they knew it was him because some of the crosses got stuck to the undercarriage of his truck.

The air america affiliate in San Antonio was talking about it.
http://www.crawfordorbust.com/

They did catch him. I think it only took them about 45 minutes, and they knew it was him because some of the crosses got stuck to the undercarriage of his truck.

The air america affiliate in San Antonio was talking about it.
http://www.crawfordorbust.com/

Ah, this just confirms my theory that hate is stupid.

If the situation was reversed and an Anti-War protestor drove over crosses put out by Pro-War grieving mothers, there would be raging rants about how they were going to be thrown into the lowest pit of hell. Apparently, though, God only cares about you if you support the Iraq war.
Not so. That would simply be a realization that the Pro-Soldier grieving mothers were in fact trying to honor those fallen. It's glaringly obvious that the crosses put up by the anti-soldier moms are just another way to gain attention by dishonoring those who died.

Sorry, but no cookies for you.

Well is the Asshole charged with anything?

Not so. That would simply be a realization that the Pro-Soldier grieving mothers were in fact trying to honor those fallen. It's glaringly obvious that the crosses put up by the anti-soldier moms are just another way to gain attention by dishonoring those who died.

Sorry, but no cookies for you.

Are you just trolling this thread? YOu seem to be skipping over all the legitimate questions I asked of you.

she is not anti-soldier, she is anti-war. I really wish you people could see that THERE IS A DIFFERENCE!

And you don't know her, you don't know what's in her head, this is her way of honoring her son's death.

Not so. That would simply be a realization that the Pro-Soldier grieving mothers were in fact trying to honor those fallen. It's glaringly obvious that the crosses put up by the anti-soldier moms are just another way to gain attention by dishonoring those who died.

Sorry, but no cookies for you.

Point to any "anti-soldier moms" involved in this discussion. Show me a soldier who is not standing up to protect the right of US citizens (their mothers included) to dissent, and I'll show you a soldier who has lost sight of the ideals of this country and shouldn't be a soldier at all.

My dear, if they were "anti-soldier", they wouldn't be saying, "bring our boys home safely." They would be saying, "Shoot the soldiers!"

Meanwhile, this woman has said that she is doing what she is doing because she believes that Bush is dishonoring fallen soldiers by using them for his own political gain. He promised her before that he would not invoke them to push his own agendas - and has broken that promise. That is the reason that she is sitting out there waiting to talk to him. If he had gone on with the war, but not used the deaths of our soldiers for his own political agendas, she most likely wouldn't be sitting there right now.

The fact that she's a mother does not insulate her from being properly criticised for dishonoring her own son's memory. Nothing can change that ... nothing! :mad: :headbang:

I agree with this statement 100%!

The guy firing the shotgun didn't break any laws. Think of it as his legally protected right to protest against the protestors who have gathered on the edge of his land.


I thought that firing a shotgun in an area where people are is similar to yelling fire in a movie theater and is outlawed as a scare tactic.

Oh...wait...it's in Texas near the president...never mind... :sniper:

The problem is that those crosses weren't placed there to "honor" any soldiers. They were placed there to call attention to the protest. If they represented any actual fallen soldiers, the poor guys are probably rolling over in their graves. I know I would! :mad: :headbang: :mad:

Damn straight.
Patriotism means supporting Bush in all things he does. If you don't support him then everything you do is unpatriotic.

War means soldiers getting killed. If you don't want our soldiers to die then you're being unpatriotic.

Since we know that you're unpatriotic, it's really annoying to see you do patriotic things, because we know, for a fact, that you hate America and everything it stands for. It's like if you're in the klan and a black guy tells you he likes you. It throws your whole perception of the world off.

That's why this guy was totally justified in vandalizing the crosses. It's an expression of his right to completly claim total ownership of the abstract concepts of patriotism and "Supporting the Troops." If he couldn't show his support for the troops, in the abstract, by destroying the rights of people who disagree with him he'd have to stoop to such base and tangible measures as donating money to the USO or Optruth.org. Or maybe joining in one of the letter writing efforts and sending actual troops DVD's and Coffee.

It's every red blooded American's right not to have to do good in concrete and real terms, but merely to think right thoughts, and that's exactly the right that this man was defending. You should thank him, because he was defending your right to do this too.

Not so. That would simply be a realization that the Pro-Soldier grieving mothers were in fact trying to honor those fallen. It's glaringly obvious that the crosses put up by the anti-soldier moms are just another way to gain attention by dishonoring those who died.

Sorry, but no cookies for you.

Eutrusca, you have to admit that I treat you generally with respect. So believe me when I tell you that you are completely unjustified in labeling a mother of a fallen soldier as "anti-soldier." You know that's an imflammatory B.S. label. You can say that their dislike of Bush has affected their judgement. You can disagree with their politics. But to suggest that they are against their own children who have died...come on dude, you are better than that. I personally dislike the war, but I would punch you in the nose if you suggested I was anti-soldier, and I haven't even had a family member die in the war.

Shame on you.

Its not clear to me what Cindy Sheehan's true intentions are, but its safe to say at the very least, she is a distraught mother who has lost her son. Not matter what the circumstances of his death are, this is still a terrible loss,not matter wether you can justify it or not.
I dont know if she is being used. I dont know if she has an agenda here. I dont know whose responsible for destroying the crosses.

I do know it looks like a game of up the ante and I dont like where its going.

At the very least, we'll see a book or movie made on this.

Considering that moms are now lining up on bothsides, for and against, which makes this that much more interesting. Frankly, this mom's credibility has already been blown and I wish we can get to an actual news story.

Damn straight.
Patriotism means supporting Bush in all things he does. If you don't support him then everything you do is unpatriotic.

This is so wrong on so many levels, I"m not even going to try to point it out to someone who obviously is a child.

War means soldiers getting killed. If you don't want our soldiers to die then you're being unpatriotic.

I don't want anyone to die. Am I unpatriotic because of this?

Since we know that you're unpatriotic, it's really annoying to see you do patriotic things, because we know, for a fact, that you hate America and everything it stands for. It's like if you're in the klan and a black guy tells you he likes you. It throws your whole perception of the world off.

Oh brother.

That's why this guy was totally justified in vandalizing the crosses. It's an expression of his right to completly claim total ownership of the abstract concepts of patriotism and "Supporting the Troops." If he couldn't show his support for the troops, in the abstract, by destroying the rights of people who disagree with him he'd have to stoop to such base and tangible measures as donating money to the USO or Optruth.org. Or maybe joining in one of the letter writing efforts and sending actual troops DVD's and Coffee.

Maybe he already does that but since these crosses were being used for a political statement, and its quite clear they were, it doesn't excuse the fact that he committed a crime and he should be punished for it.

It's every red blooded American's right not to have to do good in concrete and real terms, but merely to think right thoughts, and that's exactly the right that this man was defending. You should thank him, because he was defending your right to do this too.

I don't thank criminals.

Damn straight.
Patriotism means supporting Bush in all things he does. If you don't support him then everything you do is unpatriotic.

War means soldiers getting killed. If you don't want our soldiers to die then you're being unpatriotic.

Since we know that you're unpatriotic, it's really annoying to see you do patriotic things, because we know, for a fact, that you hate America and everything it stands for. It's like if you're in the klan and a black guy tells you he likes you. It throws your whole perception of the world off.

That's why this guy was totally justified in vandalizing the crosses. It's an expression of his right to completly claim total ownership of the abstract concepts of patriotism and "Supporting the Troops." If he couldn't show his support for the troops, in the abstract, by destroying the rights of people who disagree with him he'd have to stoop to such base and tangible measures as donating money to the USO or Optruth.org. Or maybe joining in one of the letter writing efforts and sending actual troops DVD's and Coffee.

It's every red blooded American's right not to have to do good in concrete and real terms, but merely to think right thoughts, and that's exactly the right that this man was defending. You should thank him, because he was defending your right to do this too.
Nice straw man you set up there. Nowhere did I ever advocate "supporting Bush in all things he does." Attack that all you like. It has nothing whatsoever to do with either me or my posts in this thread.

Are you just trolling this thread? YOu seem to be skipping over all the legitimate questions I asked of you.
Perhaps if you had some ... like ... you know ... "legitimate questions" I would answer them. :D

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N16165034.htm

Last night a pickup truck dragging chains ran over the rows of white crosses on the side of the road next to Cindy Sheehan's vigil in Crawford, Texas. And you probably already saw the news yesterday about President Bush's neighbor firing a shotgun into the air trying to scare the mothers of fallen soldiers who have gathered around Cindy.

Cindy and the other moms in Crawford have vowed to stay, and now a neighboring rancher, who is a veteran, has offered them some of his nearby land if they need it.

It's sad that people get so hostile towards someone expressing their opinion.


Wow, I'm pro-war and even I think that's twisted. No matter how you defend something like that, rather anyone thinks of the crosses as a travesty or not, they were meant as honor. And to literally crush crosses in their memory is kinda sick.

Perhaps if you had some ... like ... you know ... "legitimate questions" I would answer them. :D


Then point out how my questions were not legitimate. Looks to me like the answer is "yes" and that you are in fact trolling. If you cannot do so then you are dismissed *waves you off*

Guerraheim if that was a truthful response then I hope someone beats the crap out of you one day.

um, Corneliu, I think that was sarcasm you so angrily responded to.

Perhapse, Sumamba, you should re-iterate your questions from the first page.

But untill he does that, I have a few:

1) how can you call her anti-soldier? anti-war does not mean anti-soldier, and if you think it does, then we have a problem.

2) do you support the knocking down of the crosses?

she is not anti-soldier, she is anti-war. I really wish you people could see that THERE IS A DIFFERENCE!

And you don't know her, you don't know what's in her head, this is her way of honoring her son's death.
I don't give a SHIT what's in that fool woman's head! She is dishonoring her own son by her actions and that's IT! :mad: :headbang:

Then point out how my questions were not legitimate. Looks to me like the answer is "yes" and that you are in fact trolling. If you cannot do so then you are dismissed *waves you off*
( shrug ) What you do or don't do has become a matter of total indifference to me. Be as dismissive as you like.

who made you God? Who made you the final judge?

I don't give a SHIT what's in that fool woman's head! She is dishonoring her own son by her actions and that's IT! :mad: :headbang:
As has been said before, you haven't got a clue how he feels about being dead. I'd imagine not to pleased, but I don't either.

( shrug ) What you do or don't do has become a matter of total indifference to me. Be as dismissive as you like.

Why is that? Because answering my questions would make you look bad? Your 'indifference' looks more like fear of showing your true colors.

who made you God? Who made you the final judge?
Honor is a concept which escapes most of you on here, and I'm not surprised. Honor is not negotiable. It is not subject to some demented "politically correct" standard. You either behave in an honorable manner or you do not. There is no in-between. Enlisting to defend your country is an honorable act. Dying in the process of defending your fellow soliders is an honorable act. Using your son's memory to oppose the very war in which he fought is DIShonorable ... period. Non-negotiable. Non-PC. End of line.

I don't give a SHIT what's in that fool woman's head! She is dishonoring her own son by her actions and that's IT! :mad: :headbang:

Name once where she has said a bad word about her son or his fellow soldiers? Has she specifically encouraged mistreatment of soldiers? Eutrusca, I think you are being rather unreasonable here. You're confusing post-Vietnam mistreatment of soldiers with what's happening now, and it's coloring your judgement.

Yes or no, is it possible, in your mind, to oppose a war without dishonoring soldiers?

Eutrusca, I asked you two direct questions. If you want I'll ask them again.

1) how can you call her anti-soldier? anti-war does not mean anti-soldier.

2) do you support the knocking down of the crosses?

To you it is dishonor, to others it is not. Who made you the final judge?

Honor is a concept which escapes most of you on here, and I'm not surprised. Honor is not negotiable. It is not subject to some demented "politically correct" standard. You either behave in an honorable manner or you do not. There is no in-between. Enlisting to defend your country is an honorable act. Dying in the process of defending your fellow soliders is an honorable act. Using your son's memory to oppose the very war in which he fought is DIShonorable ... period. Non-negotiable. Non-PC. End of line.
So, was enlisting in the SS honorable?


There are no absolutes.

STFU Eutrusca, you are not wanted, YOU LOSE! All you're doing now is making yourself look more and more like a complete Asshole, you aren't winning any converts to your side with your tatics so Leave now.

For the last time, I'm sure Guerraheim was being sarcastic. Hopefull he can soon return to confirm or deny it.

Guerraheims entire post was sarcasm.

For the last time, I'm sure Guerraheim was being sarcastic. Hopefully he can soon return to confirm or deny it.
It most definitely seems like sarcasm.

Patriotism means supporting Bush in all things he does. If you don't support him then everything you do is unpatriotic.

Okay. Come 2008, let's say the majority of America is sick of Republican presidents for the next four years, so a very liberal and very Democratic president is voted in. This president is completely anti-war, and should we still be in Iraq by then, pulls the troops out.

Or, let's say that Bush in some way, somehow has a change of heart and does something politcally that you just plain loathe.

Now, by your logic, if you disagree with the president, you're unpatriotic. So would you bite the bullet and take it up the ass, or would you try to do something about it?

</Devil's Advocate>

EDIT: Posted this after those claiming his post was sarcastic. The question still holds though, as there are people who hold to this belief.

Eutrusca, I asked you two direct questions. If you want I'll ask them again.

1) how can you call her anti-soldier? anti-war does not mean anti-soldier.

2) do you support the knocking down of the crosses?

To you it is dishonor, to others it is not. Who made you the final judge?
Sounds like three questions to me, but whatever.

1. I call her anti-soldier because she uses the deaths of soldiers to further her own political ends. You are correct about being anti-war not equaling being anti-soldier.

2. No. That's just stupid.

3. As I stated, Honor is not subject to fucking "politically corect" bullshit. It's a time-honored concept with very clear definitions. I'm not surprised that many in your generation don't understand moral absolutes, since many of you have been taught almost from birth that there is no such thing ... everything is "relative." Well, things like honor are NOT relative. Wake up, grow up and get the fuck over it.

Eutrusca, I asked you two direct questions. If you want I'll ask them again.

1) how can you call her anti-soldier? anti-war does not mean anti-soldier.

2) do you support the knocking down of the crosses?

To you it is dishonor, to others it is not. Who made you the final judge?
I think I can guess the answers -

1) LA! LA! LA! DISHONORABLE! LA! LA! LA!

2) LA! LA! LA! DISHONORABLE CROSSES! LA! LA! LA!

Those crosses were dishonouring the memories of the fallen, so, they MUST be desicrated in order for their memories to be preserved in the purest form.
Bilge. Ultra-nationalistic bilge. And you can quote me on that.

um, Corneliu, I think that was sarcasm you so angrily responded to.

Perhapse, Sumamba, you should re-iterate your questions from the first page.

But untill he does that, I have a few:

1) how can you call her anti-soldier? anti-war does not mean anti-soldier, and if you think it does, then we have a problem.

2) do you support the knocking down of the crosses?

My questions were posted directly to Eut in response to his posts. He conveniently glossed over them because the answers to them would either rmake him look bad for being unreasonable or show him to be a complete asshat. He says they were not valid questions but cannot show how that is so.

The guy firing the shotgun didn't break any laws. Think of it as his legally protected right to protest against the protestors who have gathered on the edge of his land.
I tend to think of this kind of rationale as 'enabling' behaviour. In this case, enabling domestic terror.

Tsk-tsk.

Not at all thoughtful.

Bilge. Ultra-nationalistic bilge. And you can quote me on that.
He was being sarcastic.

1. I call her anti-soldier because she uses the deaths of soldiers to further her own political ends.
So is Bush anti-soldier? He used the death of soldiers to further his own political ends. After all, that's why Sheehan is protesting.

Sounds like three questions to me, but whatever.

1. I call her anti-soldier because she uses the deaths of soldiers to further her own political ends. You are correct about being anti-war not equaling being anti-soldier.



Sir, everyone is using the deaths of these soldiers for political ends. Bush. Cindy Sheehan. You.

As I stated, Honor is not subject to fucking "politically corect" bullshit. It's a time-honored concept with very clear definitions. I'm not surprised that many in your generation don't understand moral absolutes, since many of you have been taught almost from birth that there is no such thing ... everything is "relative." Well, things like honor are NOT relative. Wake up, grow up and get the fuck over it.
Oh, tell us those very clear definitions, Eut.



Without the use of the word, "fucking".

Using your son's memory to oppose the very war in which he fought is DIShonorable ... period. Non-negotiable. Non-PC. End of line.

What about opposing a politician's use of your son's memory to further his own political goals?

This woman is opposed to the war, but that is not the reason she has given for camping outside Bush's ranch. She is there because he promised he would not use the memory of fallen soldiers for his own political gain - and then did it anyway. She is opposed to her son's memory being used by Bush.

Is it ok with you when he does it? Or is that dishonorable as well?


Meanwhile, I don't see how pointing out that many people have died for a war that you don't agree with dishonors their memory in the least. They died honorably - and nothing will change that. But being opposed to the fact that they were fighting in the first place isn't dishonorable. It isn't dishonorable of me to be proud of someone's service in the military, while simultaneously disagreeing with the current use of that military.

3. As I stated, Honor is not subject to fucking "politically corect" bullshit. It's a time-honored concept with very clear definitions. I'm not surprised that many in your generation don't understand moral absolutes, since many of you have been taught almost from birth that there is no such thing ... everything is "relative." Well, things like honor are NOT relative. Wake up, grow up and get the fuck over it.

I believe all the things you just said about honor. I also, insedently, believe in moral absolutes. Some things are just wrong no matter what. I also agree that honor is not reletive, nor is it subject to "fucking "politically corect" bullshit." Where we differ, sir, is weather or not the act of the mother was dishonorable.

My questions were posted directly to Eut in response to his posts. He conveniently glossed over them because the answers to them would either rmake him look bad for being unreasonable or show him to be a complete asshat. He says they were not valid questions but cannot show how that is so.

Asshat! I've been wondering where I heard that word before, and I was pretty sure it was on these forums. Anyway, I love that word, and have used it on these forums since I first heard it :)

STFU Eutrusca, you are not wanted, YOU LOSE! All you're doing now is making yourself look more and more like a complete Asshole, you aren't winning any converts to your side with your tatics so Leave now.
I have no intention of leaving; I couldn't care less whether you or anyone else "wants" me or not; I have no desire to, as you so disengenously put it, "win converts;" and I will not "shut the fuck up." If you don't like it, tough. Learn to grow up a bit and perhaps you may even acquire a bit of wisdom, although I seriously, seriously doubt it. Until then, live with it. :D

I think I can guess the answers -

1) LA! LA! LA! DISHONORABLE! LA! LA! LA!

2) LA! LA! LA! DISHONORABLE CROSSES! LA! LA! LA!
Oh, that's cute.

"Look, Ma! He's learned to say 'la, la" and he's only ten years old! Wow!" :D

I have no intention of leaving; I couldn't care less whether you or anyone else "wants" me or not; I have no desire to, as you so disengenously put it, "win converts;" and I will not "shut the fuck up." If you don't like it, tough. Learn to grow up a bit and perhaps you may even acquire a bit of wisdom, although I seriously, seriously doubt it. Until then, live with it. :D
Fine by all means continue to be a fucking idiot. But no one here is agreeing with you, and if you're too stupid to realize that then I pity you. Wait, actually I don't because you're a Jackass. :p

I understand the dishonor part (I don't agree with you, but I understand what you are saying), but I can't see how you can call her anti-soldier. She is doing what she is doing because she cares about her son, a soldier, and the other soldiers dieing in this stupid war, and who's memories Bush is using for political gain.

She's not running for office, she's not married to someone who is, she doesn't get a cash prize if they bring home the troops or people don't like Bush, I really can't see what her "alterior motive" could be

I have no intention of leaving; I couldn't care less whether you or anyone else "wants" me or not; I have no desire to, as you so disengenously put it, "win converts;" and I will not "shut the fuck up." If you don't like it, tough. Learn to grow up a bit and perhaps you may even acquire a bit of wisdom, although I seriously, seriously doubt it. Until then, live with it. :D
:D

How about that clear definition, now?

Everyone lets all talk about how much of an idiot Eutrusca is instead.

I have no intention of leaving; I couldn't care less whether you or anyone else "wants" me or not; I have no desire to, as you so disengenously put it, "win converts;" and I will not "shut the fuck up." If you don't like it, tough. Learn to grow up a bit and perhaps you may even acquire a bit of wisdom, although I seriously, seriously doubt it. Until then, live with it. :D
Eut...the little smiley on the end doesn't mean you're joking, so why put it there? It's a very annoying habit of yours, especially when you're on a anti-liberal/anti-anti-war rant :D :rolleyes:

Fine by all means continue to be a fucking idiot. But no one here is agreeing with you, and if you're too stupid to realize that then I pity you. Wait, actually I don't because you're a Jackass. :p

Eutrusca and Lone Alliance both, quite it with the abusiveness. You're going to get the thread locked and more importantly, you are acting like children. Could all sides tone down the profanity? An Lone, no need to attack him. The forums are here for people to express their opinions, not to be shouted down by the majority. Logical debate is one thing, but telling someone to "STFU" and leave is quite another.

Everyone lets all talk about how much of an idiot Eutrusca is instead.

You know, this hurts, it doesn't help. I hate it when people who agree with me on an issue are jerkoffs.

The fact that she's a mother does not insulate her from being properly criticised for dishonoring her own son's memory. Nothing can change that ... nothing! :mad: :headbang:

Ya. Cause if there's one person who knows what this guy wanted or what his memory represents who do you think it's more likely to be, his own mother, or some random guy on the internet? Clearly Eutrusca is the voice of authority on all matters of maternal fielty.

Yes please lets try to discuss this like 'adults'

Flaming doesn't help and throws us off topic and makes all the people 'on your side' look bad as well

You know, this hurts, it doesn't help. I hate it when people who agree with me on an issue are jerkoffs.

Sorry I'm just pissed at him because he ran to the whine to the mods about me.

Asshat! I've been wondering where I heard that word before, and I was pretty sure it was on these forums. Anyway, I love that word, and have used it on these forums since I first heard it :)

My boyfriend is convinced that he and his friends started the use of the word and got it started propogating on the internet (although he admits that he might have just seen it there once or something and started using it in conversation and then it got propogated).

He thinks "Oh noes!" is one of his too. hehe

You know, this hurts, it doesn't help. I hate it when people who agree with me on an issue are jerkoffs.

Well, sadly the same will happen on pretty much any issue. Being right doesn't necessarily mean you're more intelligent. If you don't have the intelligence to figure out what's the right side to be on then you're as likely to end up on one side as the other.

The wrong side will almost always end up with a greater concentration of jackasses, because how glaringly wrong their position is has already weeded out most of the thoughtful intelligent people, not just because the stupidity of the position has attracted them, but there's nothing keeping either the intelligent or the stupid people from joining the right side.

Sorry I'm just pissed at him because he ran to the whine to the mods about me.

He did the same to me yesterday for calling him a Bush supporter. In retrospect I realize that it was a cheap shot, but the thread died shortly after I responded and no one answered me when I asked, how do you report someone to the mods. I wanted to go and turn myself in and say "hey! I called a guy who never shuts up about how much he's in favor of war and republicans "pro war" and "pro Bush" my bad, I'm ready for my punishment." But I couldn't find any link that said "Click here to tattle and whine."

Anyone here who can tell me how to go about it?

Toward an understanding of the concept of "honor."

"Who steals my purse steals trash; 'tis something, nothing;
'Twas mine, 'tis his, and has been slave to thousands;
But he that filches from me my good name
Robs me of that which not enriches him,
And makes me poor indeed." - William Shakespeare

He did the same to me yesterday for calling him a Bush supporter. In retrospect I realize that it was a cheap shot, but the thread died shortly after I responded and no one answered me when I asked, how do you report someone to the mods. I wanted to go and turn myself in and say "hey! I called a guy who never shuts up about how much he's in favor of war and republicans "pro war" and "pro Bush" my bad, I'm ready for my punishment." But I couldn't find any link that said "Click here to tattle and whine."

Anyone here who can tell me how to go about it?

Its called MODERATION! Go to the Moderation Forum to do that.

Well, sadly the same will happen on pretty much any issue. Being right doesn't necessarily mean you're more intelligent. If you don't have the intelligence to figure out what's the right side to be on then you're as likely to end up on one side as the other.

The wrong side will almost always end up with a greater concentration of jackasses, because how glaringly wrong their position is has already weeded out most of the thoughtful intelligent people, not just because the stupidity of the position has attracted them, but there's nothing keeping either the intelligent or the stupid people from joining the right side.
Prosecutor: "Your honor, in the matter of the arrogance of the far left, the prosecution offers the above statement in evidence and then rests."

Toward an understanding of the concept of "honor."

"Who steals my purse steals trash; 'tis something, nothing;
'Twas mine, 'tis his, and has been slave to thousands;
But he that filches from me my good name
Robs me of that which not enriches him,
And makes me poor indeed." - William Shakespeare
Okay, Eut - no points for clarity, but you do score half a point for not using the word 'fucking'. So. All that remains is to clearly define it. Perhaps you could distill something from Shakespeare's words? Though I'd much prefer to hear your own thoughts.

:)

This sounds like the sort of thing some irrational drunks would do...Chiefly because at OSU I happen to know my fair share of irrational drunks.

Prosecutor: "Your honor, in the matter of the arrogance of the far left, the prosecution offers the above statement in evidence and then rests."

Prosecutor, prosecute thyself!

For the last time, I'm sure Guerraheim was being sarcastic. Hopefull he can soon return to confirm or deny it.

I never claimed I was smart. I will delete my reply......

STFU Eutrusca, you are not wanted, YOU LOSE! All you're doing now is making yourself look more and more like a complete Asshole, you aren't winning any converts to your side with your tatics so Leave now.

Fine by all means continue to be a fucking idiot. But no one here is agreeing with you, and if you're too stupid to realize that then I pity you. Wait, actually I don't because you're a Jackass.

Everyone lets all talk about how much of an idiot Eutrusca is instead.

It's quite obvious that you aren't interested in the actual debate, but you would rather insult Eutrusca at every chance you get.
The Lone Alliance: Official Warning for Flaming



3. As I stated, Honor is not subject to fucking "politically corect" bullshit. It's a time-honored concept with very clear definitions. I'm not surprised that many in your generation don't understand moral absolutes, since many of you have been taught almost from birth that there is no such thing ... everything is "relative." Well, things like honor are NOT relative. Wake up, grow up and get the fuck over it.

Keep it civil Eutrusca. You're still treading on a very thin line here.

Oh, that's cute.

"Look, Ma! He's learned to say 'la, la" and he's only ten years old! Wow!" :D
No reason to respond to posts like that. Doing so only accomplishes what the original poster intended for, in getting your attention.



I think I can guess the answers -

1) LA! LA! LA! DISHONORABLE! LA! LA! LA!

2) LA! LA! LA! DISHONORABLE CROSSES! LA! LA! LA!
You can knock it off right now, Desperate Measures.

Everyone, take a deep breath. Hold it. Hold it. Hold it.

*passes out.

Everyone, take a deep breath. Hold it. Hold it. Hold it.

*passes out.
Wow, let's all try that again!

Is it even worth going on here? Are we ganna get any sort of intelligent debate from this thread, or is it to far gone by this point, emotions running to high?

You can knock it off right now, Desperate Measures.


The posts after 100 are currently under review.
Sorry. I don't like his way thinking and it made me feel like getting sarcastic. It wasn't the most adult way to go about things.

Oh noes! My mom wants my president to explain to her why he said he wouldn't use the memory of fallen soldiers for political gain and then turned around and did it anyway! How dare she expect my commander-in-chief to do what he says he will!!!! A citizen of my country standing up for what they believe in and expecting their elected representatives to account for their actions is sooooo unpatriotic!
He's a fucking politician. EVERYTHING they do is calculated for political gain, especially playing at that level. To convince yourself otherwise and to bitch about it when it happens it just plain naive.

I think Dem was merely pointing out a double standard. No need to get testy. She made a valid point.

He's a fucking politician. EVERYTHING they do is calculated for political gain, especially playing at that level. To convince yourself otherwise and to bitch about it when it happens it just plain naive.

*looks back at my post*

*looks at the post I was replying to*

*looks back at your reply which has so little to do with what was expressed in my post*

Where did I say that politicians don't do things for political gain? What I pointed out was that the president made a promise to this woman and then broke it. He may have done it for political gain, but she doesn't want to allow it to give him a net gain. Thus, she is trying to assure that his devious actions actually bring him a loss in political clout.

Meanwhile, Eut said that she was dishonoring her son's memory by asking her president to live up to his word. I don't really see how.

Wow, let's all try that again!


yeah right! What are you doing while we are unconscious?!
Because I would rather be conscious if it's what I hope you are doing- otherwise
Hey, where's my wallet?

yeah right! What are you doing while we are unconscious?!
Because I would rather be conscious if it's what I hope you are doing- otherwise
Hey, where's my wallet?

Wallet? I would be more concerned about why your pants are around your ankles.

THEY VANDALIZED THE AMERICAN FLAG AS WELL.

A photo that they took of the damage is here:
http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/4086/1425/1600/flattened%20crosses%20and%20flag1.jpg

The truck drove over the American flag, and as you can clearly see, the little pole was snapped, and the flag was rubbed in the dirt.

THEY VANDALIZED THE AMERICAN FLAG AS WELL.

A photo that they took of the damage is here:
http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/4086/1425/1600/flattened%20crosses%20and%20flag1.jpg

The truck drove over the American flag, and as you can clearly see, the little pole was snapped, and the flag was rubbed in the dirt.Technically, there's nothing wrong with that except the flags didn't belong to the vandals.

EDIT: I can't look at the image. Access denied...

That settles it. Pro-War people hate america and jesus.

I understand the dishonor part (I don't agree with you, but I understand what you are saying), but I can't see how you can call her anti-soldier. She is doing what she is doing because she cares about her son, a soldier, and the other soldiers dieing in this stupid war, and who's memories Bush is using for political gain.

She's not running for office, she's not married to someone who is, she doesn't get a cash prize if they bring home the troops or people don't like Bush, I really can't see what her "alterior motive" could be
I don't think she has an ulterior motive, but she certainly is not being rational about the situation. The article states that she even already has met with Bush last year. Maybe she doesn't realize it, but not every constituent of the US can have a meeting with the President, let alone two. What many fail to realize is that even on "vacation," no US President is really on vacation. And what does she want? A complete withdrawal of all troops in Iraq. So, essentially, the US won't do that for a hostage about to have his head chopped off, but for her, sure, why not? If she honestly thinks that what she is doing will persuade the government to just walk away from a multi-billion-dollar project with so many lives and years already invested, then she needs to wake up.

Also, I don’t know how much political gain Bush could possibly derive from dead soldiers. The increasing death toll has been eroding his popular support at an exponentially high rate.

That settles it. Pro-War people hate america and jesus.

I'm for the War in Iraq and I love America AND Jesus.

THEY VANDALIZED THE AMERICAN FLAG AS WELL.

A photo that they took of the damage is here:
http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/4086/1425/1600/flattened%20crosses%20and%20flag1.jpg

The truck drove over the American flag, and as you can clearly see, the little pole was snapped, and the flag was rubbed in the dirt.

personally, I'm more offended they knocked over crosses then a flag.

Accully, I'm more offended they ran over what the memorial *represented* then the accual objects, but past that, I'd be more offended about dececrating crosses then an American flag.

Technically, there's nothing wrong with that except the flags didn't belong to the vandals.

EDIT: I can't look at the image. Access denied...
You can see links to both of the images in high-resolution at Cindy's blog.

http://crawfordupdate.blogspot.com/

I'm for the War in Iraq and I love America AND Jesus.

::Sigh::
Once again, sacracsm

Well, they are crosses...

Eutrusca's responses in this thread make me wonder what multitude of sins he's hiding behind the ferocity levelled at anyone and anything which he perceives to be "anti-soldier". It has lowered him in my estimation from "idiot" to "whackjob".

That settles it. Pro-War people hate america and jesus.Sumamba, did you read the article about how NationStates is only inhabited by Nazis? That was an overgeneralization based on the actions of a few and it pissed me off. Should we do the same?

I don't think she has an ulterior motive, but she certainly is not being rational about the situation. The article states that she even already has met with Bush last year. Maybe she doesn't realize it, but not every constituent of the US can have a meeting with the President, let alone two. What many fail to realize is that even on "vacation," no US President is really on vacation. And what does she want? A complete withdrawal of all troops in Iraq. So, essentially, the US won't do that for a hostage about to have his head chopped off, but for her, sure, why not? If she honestly thinks that what she is doing will persuade the government to just walk away from a multi-billion-dollar project with so many lives and years already invested, then she needs to wake up.

Also, I don’t know how much political gain Bush could possibly derive from dead soldiers. The increasing death toll has been eroding his popular support at an exponentially high rate.
Exactly! Well said! :)

Sumamba, did you read the article about how NationStates is only inhabited by Nazis? That was an overgeneralization based on the actions of a few and it pissed me off. Should we do the same?

OH come on, I was being sarcastic! I thought that my history of usually being level-headed would be adequate evidence that I my statement was in jest. The Nazi generalization made me laugh. If it's not true then why take offense?

Sumamba, did you read the article about how NationStates is only inhabited by Nazis? That was an overgeneralization based on the actions of a few and it pissed me off. Should we do the same?
As if no one ever makes poor generalizations about people who oppose the Iraq war.

OH come on, I was being sarcastic! I thought that my history of usually being level-headed would be adequate evidence that I my statement was in jest. The Nazi generalization made me laugh. If it's not true then why take offense?Meh. Just add a :rolleyes: it helps avoid a flame war...

I don't think she has an ulterior motive, but she certainly is not being rational about the situation. The article states that she even already has met with Bush last year. Maybe she doesn't realize it, but not every constituent of the US can have a meeting with the President, let alone two. What many fail to realize is that even on "vacation," no US President is really on vacation. And what does she want? A complete withdrawal of all troops in Iraq. So, essentially, the US won't do that for a hostage about to have his head chopped off, but for her, sure, why not? If she honestly thinks that what she is doing will persuade the government to just walk away from a multi-billion-dollar project with so many lives and years already invested, then she needs to wake up.

Also, I don’t know how much political gain Bush could possibly derive from dead soldiers. The increasing death toll has been eroding his popular support at an exponentially high rate.
She has become a symbol for something larger than herself. Her questions are also the questions of many others. By her actions, she has become a sort of spokesperson for many, many people. Yes, she wants the troops to pull out. Is that possible? I don't think so and I don't think it would be wise, anyway. But Bush has not once admitted to making a mistake (any mistake at all) and why shouldn't he talk to her? Especially since she has become representative of so many people. If he had talked to her, would we be talking about this right now? Would it have blown up like it has?

As if no one ever makes poor generalizations about people who oppose the Iraq war.I don't know about you, but I've always maintained the stance that two wrongs don't make a right. It's my basis for being against the death penalty and I'm not going to give that up because it's uncomfortable for me in another situation...

As if no one ever makes poor generalizations about people who oppose the Iraq war.


It's because of people who make silly assumptions about anti-war people that they are anti-american or anti-soldier that I have so much fun with making my own dumb generalizations. It's supposed to be taken as a joke by the other side once they see how laughable such statements made against them can be.

... my history of usually being level-headed ...
Bwahahahahahahaha! OMG, that's funny! ROFLMFAO!!!!

Meh. Just add a :rolleyes: it helps avoid a flame war...

I'll try to do so for you. Sometimes it's equally as funny when people take sarcasm seriously though. I mean come on just look at the statement "Pro-war people hate america and jesus" <- *laughs maniacally* If anything they love america and jesus a little too much :p

Bwahahahahahahaha! OMG, that's funny! ROFLMFAO!!!!


So then tell me straight out that I am not normally level-headed and please provide proof.



That's what I thought.

Bwahahahahahahaha! OMG, that's funny! ROFLMFAO!!!!

Come on, children, let's keep it civil...

I'll try to do so for you. Sometimes it's equally as funny when people take sarcasm seriously though. I mean come on just look at the statement "Pro-war people hate america and jesus" <- *laughs maniacally* If anything they love america and jesus a little too much :pYou should know that I wouldn't take it seriously. Them taking sarcasm seriously when it isn't clearly marked could be considered flame baiting. I'm just trying to be your little Jimminy Cricket-style conscience :D

Toward an understanding of the concept of "honor."

"Who steals my purse steals trash; 'tis something, nothing;
'Twas mine, 'tis his, and has been slave to thousands;
But he that filches from me my good name
Robs me of that which not enriches him,
And makes me poor indeed." - William Shakespeare

No, that's a concept of "reputation."

Oh, wait. I get it now. You put honor in quotes because you're being ironic. What you mean by "honor" is actually a willingness to complain about hurt feelings and vent their frustration while dressing it up in some high-sounding rhetoric.

It's really pretty sad that our concept of honor has deteriorated so much that the word has now come to mean the mere appearance of good character rather than the actual presence of it.

Does anybody know of a good forum I can go to where everyone is over the age of ignorance?

Does anybody know of a good forum I can go to where everyone is over the age of ignorance?

It's called a Cemetary.

That settles it. Pro-War people hate america and jesus.

I'm for the War in Iraq and I love America AND Jesus.

Jesus and America F--- Yeah!

Better nobody tell me I don't love Jesus. I love him totally. It's just... well, sometimes he just won't listen. Sometimes I've had a hard day, and Jesus is like "when are you gonna say the Lord's Prayer... why are you drinking beer instead of wine... did you even say grace today...?" Sometimes a guy want's have a hamburger at the end of the week without wondering if maybe the Catholics were right. He just won't listen. And then I'm the great big jerk. I'm the one who has to come crawlin' back "aww baby, I didn't mean it. You know I have a temper. You just can't go tryin' to make a guy feel guilty all the time like that." Jesus! What a nag.

[Edit] I'm sorry Jesus. I didn't mean it. You know I love you.

I'm for the War in Iraq and I love America AND Jesus.

::Sigh::
Once again, sacracsm

I hear ya. All this sarcasm is just going right over the edge.
"Bush is a Nazi"
"Sheehan is the Anti-christ"
"Corneliu loves Jesus and America"

I mean, how much sarcasm is a person to take before all capacity to appreciate it just shuts down. I'm starting to feel like Eric Cartman in that episode of South Park when he met the people with assholes for faces.

Of course, I tend to feel like that whenever the topic of Iraq comes up.

this woman's son was a marine. he volunteered as a marine.

he was a good man who died before his time. she grieves as any mother would grieve for the loss of her son.

but to suggest that her son was some kind of FOOL, an idiot who was duped into going into the marines. that her son who knew he would be asked to risk his life in defense of his country without asking if the cause was good or bad, was somehow done wrong by having to do just that IS TO DISHONOR HIM.

she should be proud to have a son who would do what he did. she should acknowlege that he knew full well what he was doing when he became a marine. that he was willing to die for his country.

i hate the iraq war. i hate the deaths of our men and women in a bad cause. but i am very proud of the job they do and of their willingness to do their duty in extremely difficult circumstances. to reduce them to political pawns and suggest that they were tricked into losing their lives makes me sick.

our soldiers knowingly risk their lives every day in iraq. they believe in what they are doing there. they dont want to die but they are volunteers doing what needs to be done and they would not turn and run out on this committment.

My boyfriend is convinced that he and his friends started the use of the word and got it started propogating on the internet (although he admits that he might have just seen it there once or something and started using it in conversation and then it got propogated).

He thinks "Oh noes!" is one of his too. hehe

I think it got started on an episode of That 70's Show where the father used to threaten the son with being made to "wear your ass for a hat." And one time when they were all smoking marijuana the kid interpreted that as "my dad's gonna kill me" so his friend said "but I don't know if an asshat is fatal."

Does anybody know of a good forum I can go to where everyone is over the age of ignorance?
http://www.liberalforum.org/

The moderators there are nice too! :D

I've been there almost a year, and they recognize that we're all adults here. And, to quote Mark Twain, they don't stop a man from having a steak because a child can't swallow it.

And despite being named, "Liberalforum," and being moderated by Liberals, there aren't only Liberals there. They have a group called, "Esteemed," (a list of respectful, intelligent posters who serve as role models) and they even have a Libertarian within it and some Conservatives.

this woman's son was a marine. he volunteered as a marine.

he was a good man who died before his time. she grieves as any mother would grieve for the loss of her son.

but to suggest that her son was some kind of FOOL, an idiot who was duped into going into the marines. that her son who knew he would be asked to risk his life in defense of his country without asking if the cause was good or bad, was somehow done wrong by having to do just that IS TO DISHONOR HIM.

she should be proud to have a son who would do what he did. she should acknowlege that he knew full well what he was doing when he became a marine. that he was willing to die for his country.

i hate the iraq war. i hate the deaths of our men and women in a bad cause. but i am very proud of the job they do and of their willingness to do their duty in extremely difficult circumstances. to reduce them to political pawns and suggest that they were tricked into losing their lives makes me sick.

our soldiers knowingly risk their lives every day in iraq. they believe in what they are doing there. they dont want to die but they are volunteers doing what needs to be done and they would not turn and run out on this committment.
I am yet again reminded that man is not a rational, logical being.

Ashmoria, look at your post again. It's so primitive.. and... senseless. There is not even a shred of anything that could be interpreted as being close to a "logical argument." Your post is reminiscient of the pre-Socratic days when philosophy (if it could even be called that), was composed of assertive statements, with little or no reasoning to tie them together, as logic had not yet been discovered.

Your post is:
"An assumption based on my beliefs. An asumption based on my beliefs. An assumption, another assumption, which therefore proves an assumption based on my beliefs. Therefore, anyone who does not believe in the assumption based on beliefs, is DISHONORING HIM," etc, etc.

Go on. Look again. I challenge you. Please, god, man. Just look. Open up a book of Logic. Please.

Because, honestly, there is not a single piece of logic or reason in your entire post. Not one bit. And that's rather startling, because that's the first time I've ever noticed that in anyone's posts. I don't mean to offend you in any way by saying that, but it's true. Please, introspect, and try to have some coherent thought, rather than making judgements out of barbaric anger.

you know what, I just stoped caring about this thread. Whatever, y'all can think what you want, I support her.

::leaves::

it's pretty sad that a mom who looses her child gets turned into the 'bad guy'

I think she made a sacrifice as did her son, so she has a right to speak out.

I am yet again reminded that man is not a rational, logical being.

Ashmoria, look at your post again. It's so primitive.. and... senseless. There is not even a shred of anything that could be interpreted as being close to a "logical argument." Your post is reminiscient of the pre-Socratic days when philosophy (if it could even be called that), was composed of assertive statements, with little or no reasoning to tie them together, as logic had not yet been discovered.

Your post is:
"An assumption based on my beliefs. An asumption based on my beliefs. An assumption, another assumption, which therefore proves an assumption based on my beliefs. Therefore, anyone who does not believe in the assumption based on beliefs, is DISHONORING HIM," etc, etc.

Go on. Look again. I challenge you. Please, god, man. Just look. Open up a book of Logic. Please.

Because, honestly, there is not a single piece of logic or reason in your entire post. Not one bit. And that's rather startling, because that's the first time I've ever noticed that in anyone's posts. I don't mean to offend you in any way by saying that, but it's true. Please, introspect, and try to have some coherent thought, rather than making judgements out of barbaric anger.
go talk to a marine and then tell me that im wrong.

it is dishonoring someone to suggest that they sacrificed their life because they were duped into it rather than because they chose it. i dont see whats so illogical about that.

Eutrusca's responses in this thread make me wonder what multitude of sins he's hiding behind the ferocity levelled at anyone and anything which he perceives to be "anti-soldier". It has lowered him in my estimation from "idiot" to "whackjob".

No no no, the correct term here is "Centerist".

:D

Codephrase copouts aside, it boils down to Busheviks holding their Messiah as "More Equal than Others" in terms of using the death of others for publicity gains. It's okay for Bush to say the Ghosts of 9-11 Past are crying out for vengeance against Iraq, but if a grieving mother of a dead soldier believes he was sent in under a lie she's suddenly a Commie Mutant Traitor who's dishonoring the memory of her son.

Hypocrisy. Plain and simple.

Codephrase copouts aside, it boils down to Busheviks holding their Messiah as "More Equal than Others" in terms of using the death of others for publicity gains. It's okay for Bush to say the Ghosts of 9-11 Past are crying out for vengeance against Iraq, but if a grieving mother of a dead soldier believes he was sent in under a lie she's suddenly a Commie Mutant Traitor who's dishonoring the memory of her son.

(bolding mine)

The Computer is always right.

go talk to a marine and then tell me that im wrong.

it is dishonoring someone to suggest that they sacrificed their life because they were duped into it rather than because they chose it. i dont see whats so illogical about that.

Only if one is wrong about them being drawn into a war that was started on false pretenses and has been woefully planned by those at the top.

go talk to a marine and then tell me that im wrong.

it is dishonoring someone to suggest that they sacrificed their life because they were duped into it rather than because they chose it. i dont see whats so illogical about that.

But what if you found out that the reasons you supported the war for turned out to be demonstrably false?

As a marine he may have been willing to die to defend his country, but if you don't accept the premise that the Iraq war was defending this country then you aren't going to be impressed by the argument "he was willing to die for his country because he was a marine." She has good reason to believe that her son didn't die for his country. He may have thought he was dying for his country, but if she sees no national interest that is served by this war then she is right to believe that Bush just flushed her son's life down the toilet.

BTW, I speak with a marine about this sort of thing routinely. He agrees with me. He thinks that Bush is a lousy president and feels bad that many of his friends are still "brainwashed." His word, not mine. He also says that now that he's out of the military he's going through "deprogramming." And he's against the war in Iraq.

But what if you found out that the reasons you supported the war for turned out to be demonstrably false?

As a marine he may have been willing to die to defend his country, but if you don't accept the premise that the Iraq war was defending this country then you aren't going to be impressed by the argument "he was willing to die for his country because he was a marine." She has good reason to believe that her son didn't die for his country. He may have thought he was dying for his country, but if she sees no national interest that is served by this war then she is right to believe that Bush just flushed her son's life down the toilet.

BTW, I speak with a marine about this sort of thing routinely. He agrees with me. He thinks that Bush is a lousy president and feels bad that many of his friends are still "brainwashed." His word, not mine. He also says that now that he's out of the military he's going through "deprogramming." And he's against the war in Iraq.

I have a Marine friend who is also against the war and she has said much of the same kinds of things.

I just asked this question on another thread, but I'm not expecting a valid response from there, so I'll put the question to you, here:

How does one 'honour' something they are philisophically opposed to?

Only if one is wrong about them being drawn into a war that was started on false pretenses and has been woefully planned by those at the top.
there is nothing wrong with being against the war. even if you have a son in iraq. im against the war and have been since the nonsensical justifications for it started.

what is wrong is to say that any of our soldiers died because they were fools to join the military to begin with. because they didnt know what they were doing when they volunteered. i dont see that as being a common feeling among our men and women who are currently serving their country. they are doing a massively difficult job and are doing it very well. they have everything to be proud of.

when they are killed in the line of duty it is a tragedy. ive cried over the deaths of men ive never met. but these are men and women who were willing to risk their lives. that doesnt make it OK that they died but to suggest that they were tricked or duped or forced is to diminish their sacrifice.

when they are killed in the line of duty it is a tragedy. ive cried over the deaths of men ive never met. but these are men and women who were willing to risk their lives. that doesnt make it OK that they died but to suggest that they were tricked or duped or forced is to diminish their sacrifice.
Ashmoria, I have to disagree with you. Suggesting they were tricked or duped or forced doesn't actually diminish their sacrifice. It diminishes war as a romantic or noble activity.

there is nothing wrong with being against the war. even if you have a son in iraq. im against the war and have been since the nonsensical justifications for it started.

what is wrong is to say that any of our soldiers died because they were fools to join the military to begin with. because they didnt know what they were doing when they volunteered. i dont see that as being a common feeling among our men and women who are currently serving their country. they are doing a massively difficult job and are doing it very well. they have everything to be proud of.

when they are killed in the line of duty it is a tragedy. ive cried over the deaths of men ive never met. but these are men and women who were willing to risk their lives. that doesnt make it OK that they died but to suggest that they were tricked or duped or forced is to diminish their sacrifice.

On the other hand promoting their sacrifice even in the face of a blatant lie is to deem all soldiers expendible and inconsequential.

Cindy Sheehan never protested the fact that her son died in the line of duty or that he chose to do so. What she objected to was that Bush told her he would not use such deaths for a publicity ploy and he flip-flopped and did it anyways. That and the fact that Bush sold a load of crap to the American public about Iraq being 48 hours from launching ICBMs towards Washington.

there is nothing wrong with being against the war. even if you have a son in iraq. im against the war and have been since the nonsensical justifications for it started.

what is wrong is to say that any of our soldiers died because they were fools to join the military to begin with. because they didnt know what they were doing when they volunteered. i dont see that as being a common feeling among our men and women who are currently serving their country. they are doing a massively difficult job and are doing it very well. they have everything to be proud of.

when they are killed in the line of duty it is a tragedy. ive cried over the deaths of men ive never met. but these are men and women who were willing to risk their lives. that doesnt make it OK that they died but to suggest that they were tricked or duped or forced is to diminish their sacrifice.

Has Mrs. Sheehan ever called her son a fool? The soldier's sacrifice was to serve their country. The dishonor is for those who would misuse that absolute loyalty (not foolishness, innocence, or gullibility,) for less than proper purposes. The soldiers put their faith into the fact that they would be put to good use. How is it any knock on their honor to want to investigate whether that faith was misplaced or not?

She has become a symbol for something larger than herself. Her questions are also the questions of many others. By her actions, she has become a sort of spokesperson for many, many people. Yes, she wants the troops to pull out. Is that possible? I don't think so and I don't think it would be wise, anyway. But Bush has not once admitted to making a mistake (any mistake at all) and why shouldn't he talk to her? Especially since she has become representative of so many people. If he had talked to her, would we be talking about this right now? Would it have blown up like it has?
Maybe, overall, it would be better for Bush to just appease her. But the answer will invariably be the same - the US will not pull out of Iraq. And who is to say this woman won't want a third, fourth, tenth meeting until she gets hat she wants? If she is already so disillusioned that she thinks that a full retreat from Iraq is plausible, then who knows what else she thinks is a viable option.

go talk to a marine and then tell me that im wrong.

it is dishonoring someone to suggest that they sacrificed their life because they were duped into it rather than because they chose it. i dont see whats so illogical about that.
*hits his head against a wall*

There are marines that have been deserters. Like the guy in Canada, who was not a coward, because he served in Iraq for 6 months, without any problems. But they wanted to send him back again, and he refused.

Not all marines are Republicans. Under a warmongering, Republican President, though, they aren't allowed to speak their mind, because "disloyal speech," is against the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

So, it's not that it's impossible for a soldier to speak out, but if he did, he'd be be court-martialled. My philosophy professor served on the front-lines in Vietnam and he said that only fools who sit at home are "pro war." Because they've never had the experience of accidentally shooting innocent children (or having to suspect innocent children), or seeing rotting human corpses, or not knowing if today is going to be the day you die.

You talk so passionately, but you seem to not know what you're talking about at all.

My father served in the British Army in Northern Ireland, and he said that there's a lot of myths about the military. On TV and in movies, they truly portray a ridiculously incorrect stereotype. It's always a muscular, tattooed, man with a body like a Greek God, and the courage to match. They never show a nerd who works on nuclear subs, jacking off to pornography in bed, and hoping nobody else sees him. My father also said that you'd really be surprised at how guys in the military are just average people, just as cowardly or brave as anyone else.

"The army is a mirror of society and suffers form all its ills, usually at higher temperatures.”
-Leon Trotsky, founder and commander of the Soviet Army

My father also once knew a U.S. Navy admiral who had a silver star, and he said that the "heroes," in war are not guys with unrelenting courage, but men who cannot take it anymore, and throw themselves at the enemy, not out of bravery, but because they're suicidal.

"The army is a mirror of society and suffers form all its ills, usually at higher temperatures.”
-Leon Trotsky, founder and commander of the Soviet ArmyRed Army. :p

I just asked this question on another thread, but I'm not expecting a valid response from there, so I'll put the question to you, here:

How does one 'honour' something they are philisophically opposed to?

One acknowledges that the people who are there fighting are doing so out of bravery and devotion to their country and to their brothers in arms, even if one personally believes that the politicians who sent them there are corrupt bastards.

One votes for and advocates politicians who oppose the war, but donates money to institutions like the USO or Optruth.org whose purpose is not to create or promote war, but to make life more bearable for those who willingly put their lives on the line risking being put to death either because of corrupt domestic politicans or aggresive foreign ones.

One does NOT simply claim to support or honor them by sending more of them off to meet the same fate for the same hollow cause.

Red Army. :p
Oh, come on! An army is an army is an army. :cool:

Has Mrs. Sheehan ever called her son a fool? The soldier's sacrifice was to serve their country. The dishonor is for those who would misuse that absolute loyalty (not foolishness, innocence, or gullibility,) for less than proper purposes. The soldiers put their faith into the fact that they would be put to good use. How is it any knock on their honor to want to investigate whether that faith was misplaced or not?

One of the defining elements of the conservative psyche is a lack of empathy. They're notoriously proud of it. That's why Karl Rove said that liberals want to put Osama Bin Laden in therapy. He's saying that it is somehow cowardly and unmanly to try to understand what motivates other human beings when it is simpler to just drop bombs on them or run over them with trucks.

When you tell a conservative what your position is, he tells you what would have to be wrong with him to make him arive at the same one.

E.g.
Lib: I live in New York.
Con: Well I'm able to fire a gun and eat wild game and work three minimum wage jobs and complain about the welfare state.
Lib: I just did a 10K run.
Con: I own a car.
Lib: I think murder is a bad thing.
Con: I own a gun.
Lib: I don't believe in the death penalty.
Con: I think that when I die Jesus will bring me up to heaven.

Maybe, overall, it would be better for Bush to just appease her. But the answer will invariably be the same - the US will not pull out of Iraq. And who is to say this woman won't want a third, fourth, tenth meeting until she gets hat she wants? If she is already so disillusioned that she thinks that a full retreat from Iraq is plausible, then who knows what else she thinks is a viable option.
I don't feel like she will want a third or tenth meeting. I don't really think she wants to be briefed on a daily basis. Think and feel, not so strong words to use but even if she did, you can bet that she won't have the support that she has now. Mistakes were made in this war. I think that is something most people can agree on, even if you are pro-war. It is not something that even needs to be televised. Bush is not taking any responsibility for any short comings happening in the war. He makes himself look weak by not talking with her but mostly by not admitting to making mistakes.

One of the defining elements of the conservative psyche is a lack of empathy. They're notoriously proud of it. That's why Karl Rove said that liberals want to put Osama Bin Laden in therapy. He's saying that it is somehow cowardly and unmanly to try to understand what motivates other human beings when it is simpler to just drop bombs on them or run over them with trucks.
The lack of empathy and willingness to understand human motivation might be one of the contributing factors to why Iraqnam is creeping ever closer to the Quagmire Mark. Instead of trying to figure out what drives the insurgency and undermine their support and mandate, the Busheviks assume "They Hate Our Freedom™" and that a shotgun democratization will solve the region's problems.

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N16165034.htm

Last night a pickup truck dragging chains ran over the rows of white crosses on the side of the road next to Cindy Sheehan's vigil in Crawford, Texas. And you probably already saw the news yesterday about President Bush's neighbor firing a shotgun into the air trying to scare the mothers of fallen soldiers who have gathered around Cindy.

Cindy and the other moms in Crawford have vowed to stay, and now a neighboring rancher, who is a veteran, has offered them some of his nearby land if they need it.

It's sad that people get so hostile towards someone expressing their opinion.

What do you expact from neocons? Understanding? Respect? :rolleyes:
People like the followers of Rumsfailed can be proud of them self once again.

I understand the dishonor part (I don't agree with you, but I understand what you are saying), but I can't see how you can call her anti-soldier. She is doing what she is doing because she cares about her son, a soldier, and the other soldiers dieing in this stupid war, and who's memories Bush is using for political gain.


http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/world/iraq/20050816-0714-ca-iraqmemorial.html

SANTA BARBARA – The mother of a Lompoc soldier killed in Iraq is demanding that her son's name be removed from what she considers anti-war memorials on the beach here and outside President Bush's Texas ranch.

Air Force Capt. Derek Argel's remains were buried with four of his comrades at Arlington National Cemetery last week. His mother, Debbie Argel Bastian, says the other memorials are an insult to his memory.

"I'm livid about it," Bastian said of the weekly beach display on Santa Barbara's West Beach and the smaller memorial in Texas, where the mother of another dead soldier has made headlines with a weeklong protest.

"Derek would not want to be remembered that way."

Argel, 28, was killed in a plane crash on Memorial Day during a training mission northwest of Baghdad.

Almost every weekend since Veteran's Day 2003, volunteers with the Santa Barbara chapter of Veterans for Peace have erected in the sand a display of crosses – now numbering more than 1,800 – representing U.S. soldiers killed in Iraq. The memorial has received international attention and other towns around the nation have replicated it.

Organizers say the display is not an anti-war statement but is intended to "make the consequences of war real, and to allow people to express their grief, respect and thoughts." While the group will not remove Argel's cross, it may, out of deference to Bastian, move it out of the front row, said Lane Anderson, a Veterans for Peace member.

Cindy Sheehan of Vacaville, Calif., has attracted international attention for her vigil outside President Bush's ranch. Sheehan's 24-year-old son, Casey, was killed in Iraq in April 2004.

Bastian said she thinks Sheehan's protest is inappropriate in a time of war.

She also has been posting on mikey moore's website. If that isn't whoring yourself out for a certain political party, I don't know what is.

Eutrusca's responses in this thread make me wonder what multitude of sins he's hiding behind the ferocity levelled at anyone and anything which he perceives to be "anti-soldier". It has lowered him in my estimation from "idiot" to "whackjob".

Not only did you mock him as a person, but you went ahead and mocked his very well-being.
Refused Party Program: Official Warning for Flaming


I'm about tired of all of this 'taunt Eutrusca so that he flames you' crap. Those of you caught doing it will be warned for attempting to bait him, as well as those who continue to outright flame him.

Not only did you mock him as a person, but you went ahead and mocked his very well-being.
Refused Party Program: Official Warning for Flaming


I'm about tired of all of this 'taunt Eutrusca so that he flames you' crap. Those of you caught doing it will be warned for attempting to bait him, as well as those who continue to outright flame him.

And I am tired about all those who abuse moderation to express their views constantly that favour right wing Etruscas flaiming. Haven't taunted Eurusca but never saw a warning to his often trolling and attempts to bait other posters. Where is your neutrality in other topics :rolleyes:
Yep, he is well protected.

And I am tired about all those who abuse moderation to express their views constantly that favour right wing Etruscas flaiming. Haven't taunted Eurusca but never saw a warning to his often trolling and attempts to bait other posters. Where is your neutrality in other topics :rolleyes:
Yep, he is well protected.
Actually, he's been banned before, if I remember correctly.

And I am tired about all those who abuse moderation to express their views constantly that favour right wing Etruscas flaiming. Haven't taunted Eurusca but never saw a warning to his often trolling and attempts to bait other posters. Where is your neutrality in other topics :rolleyes:
Yep, he is well protected.
He's gotten a ban before (eu).


But come on, a warning for that? A bit excessive...

Actually, he's been banned before, if I remember correctly.

How, did not know that, I am sorry. (You mean Eutrusca do you?)
He can afford him things that others can't due to some "mods".

Mistakes were made in this war. I think that is something most people can agree on, even if you are pro-war. It is not something that even needs to be televised. Bush is not taking any responsibility for any short comings happening in the war. He makes himself look weak by not talking with her but mostly by not admitting to making mistakes.
This, I can slap an /agree on. I'm still wary of where speaking with her might lead to, as I could imagine many, many more attempting the same thing afterwards. But it would be nice if Bush could examine both the good and bad and recognize them publicly.

And I am tired about all those who abuse moderation to express their views constantly that favour right wing Etruscas flaiming. Haven't taunted Eurusca but never saw a warning to his often trolling and attempts to bait other posters. Where is your neutrality in other topics. Yep, he is well protected.
Not all the moderators are conservative here. I do think that the most active happen to be, but I have seen, and debated, with points from moderators that are on both sides.

And I am tired about all those who abuse moderation to express their views constantly that favour right wing Etruscas flaiming. Haven't taunted Eurusca but never saw a warning to his often trolling and attempts to bait other posters. Where is your neutrality in other topics :rolleyes:
Yep, he is well protected.

Actually no they are not. They follow the rules of the boards.

I have argued with a few and they haven't abused their powers.

The rules are laid out, you follow them and you can argue with a mod all you want.

Break them and you get warned then banned.......

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/world/iraq/20050816-0714-ca-iraqmemorial.html



She also has been posting on mikey moore's website. If that isn't whoring yourself out for a certain political party, I don't know what is.

Perhaps vomiting up FOX news talking points.

What do you expact from neocons? Understanding? Respect? :rolleyes:
People like the followers of Rumsfailed can be proud of them self once again.

Velo, I love how you try to paint all of us in a broad brush. I myself hope the idiot that did this gets punished for it and *gasp* I supported the Iraq war.

I bet they come back dressed in white sheets like ghosts and try to scare the moms away

http://www.thesunmachine.net/image_archive/archive/cookd/kkk05.jpg

What do you expact from neocons? Understanding? Respect? :rolleyes:
People like the followers of Rumsfailed can be proud of them self once again.


Rumsfailed. :D Nice.

Well I dunno if those that blindly support Bush are all neo-cons. Surely some of them just support him because he is (supposedly) a religious republican. They seem to have unquestioning support for their party despite what their leaders do because of some strange loyalty to a false idea of what they think Bush stands for.

Some will admit that Bush is a liar, and that he will use whatever he wants for his own political goals, yet they are perfectly okay with that and will call anyone who might have an opposing opinion an anti-American pinko, commie, bleeding-heart liberal, no-brain idiot who hates the troops and would spit on them the instant he see's one come back from Iraq.

I am proud of the Vet that offered the protesters a safe place on his property. I worry for his safety now though.

Velo, I love how you try to paint all of us in a broad brush.

yes, very kinky indeed

Perhaps vomiting up FOX news talking points.
Ironically, I don't watch much TV, let alone waste my time watching Fox News.

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/world/iraq/20050816-0714-ca-iraqmemorial.html



She also has been posting on mikey moore's website. If that isn't whoring yourself out for a certain political party, I don't know what is.

Guilt by association? Can we then assume that Republicans all condone David Duke?

I didn't think so.

This, I can slap an /agree on. I'm still wary of where speaking with her might lead to, as I could imagine many, many more attempting the same thing afterwards. But it would be nice if Bush could examine both the good and bad and recognize them publicly.

There's nothing better than coming to some sort of understanding instead of staying behind divided lines.

I'm no supporter of Cindy sheehag, but whoever descrated those Crosses deserves a serious beatdown.

Not only did you mock him as a person, but you went ahead and mocked his very well-being.
Refused Party Program: Official Warning for Flaming


I'm about tired of all of this 'taunt Eutrusca so that he flames you' crap. Those of you caught doing it will be warned for attempting to bait him, as well as those who continue to outright flame him.
Uh... Not to quest your judgement, Euro, but shouldn't you start calling out Eustrusca on trolling? In earlier posts he was being at best infantile and childish. His posts at times did border on trolling. Could you please take a look at his posts?

Bilge. Ultra-nationalistic bilge. And you can quote me on that.
He was being sarcastic.
Thank you. It was too stupid to be serious (even for me).

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N16165034.htm

Last night a pickup truck dragging chains ran over the rows of white crosses on the side of the road next to Cindy Sheehan's vigil in Crawford, Texas. And you probably already saw the news yesterday about President Bush's neighbor firing a shotgun into the air trying to scare the mothers of fallen soldiers who have gathered around Cindy.

Cindy and the other moms in Crawford have vowed to stay, and now a neighboring rancher, who is a veteran, has offered them some of his nearby land if they need it.

It's sad that people get so hostile towards someone expressing their opinion.


He was practicing for dove season, tards

I don't think she has an ulterior motive, but she certainly is not being rational about the situation. The article states that she even already has met with Bush last year. Maybe she doesn't realize it, but not every constituent of the US can have a meeting with the President, let alone two. What many fail to realize is that even on "vacation," no US President is really on vacation. And what does she want? A complete withdrawal of all troops in Iraq. So, essentially, the US won't do that for a hostage about to have his head chopped off, but for her, sure, why not? If she honestly thinks that what she is doing will persuade the government to just walk away from a multi-billion-dollar project with so many lives and years already invested, then she needs to wake up.

From what she has said, she fully understands that she isn't going to personally get an end to the war.

What she wants to talk to the president about is the fact that he broke the promise he made to her in their earlier meeting. He promised not to use the memory of fallen soldiers to further his political goals - and has done it anyways. She wants an explanation for him breaking that promise.

this woman's son was a marine. he volunteered as a marine.

he was a good man who died before his time. she grieves as any mother would grieve for the loss of her son.

but to suggest that her son was some kind of FOOL, an idiot who was duped into going into the marines. that her son who knew he would be asked to risk his life in defense of his country without asking if the cause was good or bad, was somehow done wrong by having to do just that IS TO DISHONOR HIM.

she should be proud to have a son who would do what he did. she should acknowlege that he knew full well what he was doing when he became a marine. that he was willing to die for his country.

Interestingly enough, I have never seen anything that suggests she thinks he was a fool or an idiot. I have seen nothing to suggest that she thinks he was duped into joining the marines or that he was not willing to die for his country.

She is opposed to THIS WAR, not the military in general, or the honorable reasons that many join it.

i hate the iraq war. i hate the deaths of our men and women in a bad cause. but i am very proud of the job they do and of their willingness to do their duty in extremely difficult circumstances. to reduce them to political pawns and suggest that they were tricked into losing their lives makes me sick.

There is evidence that the American people were tricked into going into war. Thus, the soldiers in Iraq who have died, very well may have died as the result of a trick. It doesn't in any way diminish their contributions, or their honor. It diminishes that of those in charge perpetuating the trick.

our soldiers knowingly risk their lives every day in iraq. they believe in what they are doing there. they dont want to die but they are volunteers doing what needs to be done and they would not turn and run out on this committment.

Not completely true. Soldiers risk their lives and believe in the ideals they are to represent. Not all of them agree with this war and believe in "what they are doing there." They do it because they honor the committments they have to the military, not because they honor the particular war they are in.

He was practicing for dove season, tards
His cousin is going to give her and her supporters land closer to Bush's ranch.

How would you feel if a bunch of people who disagreed with you pulled up in your front yard all of a sudden?
But still, tearing up crosses? That's crap. And I feel for Ms Sheehan, as I do everyone else who has lost a loved one in Iraq. I don't feel for people who wnat their loved ones' losses to be in vain.

I bet they come back dressed in white sheets like ghosts and try to scare the moms away


Are you suggesting that Bush's neighbours are members of the KKK?!!! :eek:

Not only did you mock him as a person, but you went ahead and mocked his very well-being.
Refused Party Program: Official Warning for Flaming


Fair enough.

Actually, he's been banned before, if I remember correctly.
Twice.

GOPUSA HAS A GOOD ARTICLE ON CINDY (http://www.gopusa.com/news/2005/august/0817_sheehan_rightwingers2.shtml)

Don't think you're a "good," Conservative because you're heartless and blindly partisan.

I found a video with her message.

I think we should all give this a fair shot and at least listen even if we all have varying opinions.

This video I found through a pro-democracy and anti-Bush policy site.

It's very simple and I think she makes her message clear - she is trying to prevent other mothers from going through the same pain she did.

Click to watch (http://www.angelfire.com/de3/4osad/CindySheehan.mov).

Even if you don't support, maybe you should watch.

The fact that she's a mother does not insulate her from being properly criticised for dishonoring her own son's memory. Nothing can change that ... nothing! :mad: :headbang:


How do you know that Casey Sheehan would consider his mother's actions dishonoring his memory? Did you know him? Did he ever say to you "If I die, I just hope my mom doesn't hold vigil outside the President's ranch"? Maybe he would be embarrassed by her, maybe not. Who are you to say?

Good article and video guys. I don't think that those who are foaming at the mouth over Cindy will be able to watch the video or read the article without breaking something.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Are you suggesting that Bush's neighbours are members of the KKK?!!!

I have to wonder, why is a KKK member more likely to be a Republican? Just a question... I am guessing because of Religious issues maybe? Or because people in the rural areas are raised to hate those liberal city folk who embrace racial differences? *shrug*

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I was going to ask for this topic to be locked because things have gotten out of hand so many times because of all the mod attention it's getting because of a few posters who have gone a bit overboard.

But then I thought about this: I don't think that most of those claiming she is dishonoring soldiers really believe that. They are just raising a stink because this is getting so much media attention and is making their leader Bush look bad.

So, I think it's best to put as much attention on this issue as possible because it looks like the movement is growing, and therefore believe I'll keep it open, and hope for a bit more civility from all around.

It's ashame that you have to consider a lock request because of a few people.

I didn't mind those who disagreed on civil grounds.