NationStates Jolt Archive

WIKI: Thomas P. Cadmus is National Commander of The American Legion.

"Cadmus said. “We must never let that happen again. I assure you, The American Legion will stand against anyone and any group that would demoralize our troops, or worse, endanger their lives by encouraging terrorists to continue their cowardly attacks against freedom loving peoples.”"


" “We had hoped that the lessons learned from the Vietnam War would be clear to our fellow citizens: public protests against the war here at home while our young men and women are in harm’s way on the other side of the globe only provide aid and comfort to our enemies."

Sourcage (http://www.legion.org/?section=pub_relations&subsection=pr_listreleases&content=pr_press_release&id=303)
:mad:

Source?

Is he referring to protests in Iraq or protests in the US?

Source?

Here you go! (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_P._Cadmus)

"Do not forget that the Fascisti are to Italy what the American Legion is to the United States.""

I hate these guys... (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Legion#2000.27s)

Heh. Yeah. Let's kill people for their political views.

Ummm...I just read the press release (http://www.legion.org/?section=pub_relations&subsection=pr_listreleases&content=pr_press_release&id=303) by the AL, and It never says the words that you quoted him saying.

can't call him a prik for statinmg his views....can you?

Ummm...I just read the press release (http://www.legion.org/?section=pub_relations&subsection=pr_listreleases&content=pr_press_release&id=303) by the AL, and It never says the words that you quoted him saying.

And this is why Wiki's are not reliable sources.

The South Islands : Damn wiki, sorry about that. * goes to edit *

And this is why Wiki's are not reliable sources.

Yes, sinse there are no other sources listed, I am inclined to believe tht this wiki is not reliable.

And this is why Wiki's are not reliable sources.

On their own, that's true. With other sources that agree with Wiki, then it's reliable-ish, unless you're talking about baseball or Final Fantasy, in which case they are reliable on their own. Just thought I'd clear that up.

*cough* (http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1001020671)

"The American Legion will stand against anyone and any group that would demoralize our troops, or worse, endanger their lives by encouraging terrorists to continue their cowardly attacks against freedom-loving peoples," Thomas Cadmus, national commander, told delegates at the group's national convention in Honolulu.

The delegates voted to use whatever means necessary to "ensure the united backing of the American people to support our troops and the global war on terrorism."

Not in the quote, but in what was voted for, suggesting a clumsier synonym was used. Still, you get the idea.

can't call him a prik for statinmg his views....can you?

Apparently you can when you copy and paste your falsified quote into an internet notepad and and call it a source.
This is where he got the creative juices from...

The 2.7-million member organization had "vowed to use whatever means necessary to ensure the united support of the American people for our troops and the global war on terrorism."

You realize of course that the AL is a government-chartered group (Chartered by Congress in either 1918 or 1919; I forget which), so of course it would stay loyal to its charterer

can't call him a prik for statinmg his views....can you?

Yes, one can. He can state his opinion all he wants, and other people can state theirs' in response.

Calling him a prick is probably better than suggesting that we should squelch his pro-war stance "by any means necessary," i.e., through violence and possibly death.

His views are typical of the pro-Iraq war contigent. They really have no factual evidence backing them up; all the reasons given for going to war have turned out to be false, so they simply attempt to label anyone who disagrees with them as a traitor who is somehow attempting to undermine his/her troops and get them killed, rather than a tax-paying American who doesn't like what's being done in his/her name. To suggest that people who conscientiously don't like what's happening should just shut up and keep their opinions to themselves is completely asinine.

Yes, one can. He can state his opinion all he wants, and other people can state theirs' in response.

Calling him a prick is probably better than suggesting that we should squelch his pro-war stance "by any means necessary," i.e., through violence and possibly death.

His views are typical of the pro-Iraq war contigent. They really have no factual evidence backing them up; all the reasons given for going to war have turned out to be false, so they simply attempt to label anyone who disagrees with them as a traitor who is somehow attempting to undermine his/her troops and get them killed, rather than a tax-paying American who doesn't like what's being done in his/her name. To suggest that people who conscientiously don't like what's happening should just shut up and keep their opinions to themselves is completely asinine.


Did you accualy read the press release?

It does not say we should squelch oppisition "by any means nessesary."

can't call him a prik for statinmg his views....can you?

The world would be a LOT beter a place if it had more people like you.

WIKI: Thomas P. Cadmus is National Commander of The American Legion.

"Cadmus said. “We must never let that happen again. I assure you, The American Legion will stand against anyone and any group that would demoralize our troops, or worse, endanger their lives by encouraging terrorists to continue their cowardly attacks against freedom loving peoples.”"


" “We had hoped that the lessons learned from the Vietnam War would be clear to our fellow citizens: public protests against the war here at home while our young men and women are in harm’s way on the other side of the globe only provide aid and comfort to our enemies."

Sourcage (http://www.legion.org/?section=pub_relations&subsection=pr_listreleases&content=pr_press_release&id=303)
:mad:
I tend to agree with him, but still, the right to freedom of expression is one of the primary rights for which those of us who wore the uniform fought. I suspect this should be considered "intemperate speech" on his part.

Did you accualy read the press release?

It does not say we should squelch oppisition "by any means nessesary."

But Moore-esque editing is much more effective in getting people to say what you want them to.

Why Mooresque?
Because it is patently false?
Or because it's pruposefully taken out of context to demonize the autor's opponents?

You were refering to Michael Moore right?