One Mother's Loss Becomes a Problem for the President

[steven]

CRAWFORD, Tex., Aug. 7 - President Bush draws antiwar protesters just about wherever he goes, but few generate the kind of attention that Cindy Sheehan has since she drove down the winding road toward his ranch here this weekend and sought to tell him face to face that he must pull all Americans troops out of Iraq now.

Ms. Sheehan's son, Casey, was killed last year in Iraq, after which she became an antiwar activist. She says she and her family met with the president two months later at Fort Lewis in Washington State.

But when she was blocked by the police a few miles from Mr. Bush's 1,600-acre spread on Saturday, the 48-year-old Ms. Sheehan of Vacaville, Calif., was transformed into a news media phenomenon, the new face of opposition to the Iraq conflict at a moment when public opinion is in flux and the politics of the war have grown more complicated for the president and the Republican Party.

Seeking to head off exactly the situation that now seems to be unfolding, the administration sent two senior officials out from the ranch on Saturday afternoon to meet with her. But Ms. Sheehan said after talking to the officials - Stephen J. Hadley, the national security adviser, and Joe Hagin, a deputy White House chief of staff - that she would not back down in her demand to see the president.

The deaths last week of 20 Marines from a single battalion has focused public attention on the unremitting pace of casualties in Iraq, providing her an opening to deliver her message that no more lives should be given to the war. At the same time, polls that show falling approval for Mr. Bush's handling of the war have left him open to challenge in a way that he was not when the nation appeared to be more strongly behind him.

As the mother of an Army specialist who was killed at age 24 in the Sadr City section of Baghdad on April 4, 2004, Ms. Sheehan's story is certainly compelling. She is also articulate, aggressive in delivering her message and has information that most White House reporters have not heard before: how Mr. Bush handles himself when he meets behind closed doors with the families of soldiers killed in Iraq.

The White House has released few details of such sessions, which Mr. Bush holds regularly as he travels the country, but generally portrays them as emotional and an opportunity for the president to share the grief of the families. In Ms. Sheehan's telling, though, Mr. Bush did not know her son's name when she and her family met with him in June 2004 at Fort Lewis. Mr. Bush, she said, acted as if he were at a party and behaved disrespectfully toward her by referring to her as "Mom" throughout the meeting.

"I said, 'Trust me, you don't want to go there'," Ms. Sheehan said, recounting her exchange with the president. "He said, 'You're right, I don't.' I said, 'Well, thanks for putting me there.' "

Asked about Ms. Sheehan's statements, Trent D. Duffy, a spokesman for the White House, said Sunday: "The president knows one of his most important responsibilities is to comfort the families of the fallen. That is why he has personally met with and grieved with hundreds of families who have lost a loved one who made the ultimate sacrifice. We can only imagine how painful and difficult it must be for a mother to lose her son. Our hearts and prayers are always with the moms and dads and spouses and children of those who have fallen."

It is not clear how the White House will handle Ms. Sheehan. Mr. Bush usually comes and goes from the ranch by helicopter, but he might have to drive by her on Friday, when he is scheduled to attend a Republican fund-raiser at a ranch just down the road from where Ms. Sheehan is camped out. She will no doubt get another wave of publicity on Thursday, when Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice join Mr. Bush at the ranch to discuss the war.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/08/politics/08crawford.html

[jbinbny]

I grieve for that woman. I truly do.

But war is hell. I've had friends killed in action and somehow, someway you've got to realize that their's is an ultimate sacrifice

Sometimes I think that only those that have served understand this.

I think we can only honor their memory and win this war they gave their lives for.

Some people on this board wont understand what I'm trying to say.

And some will.

I'll leave it at that!

[WestCoastPerspective]

Yah, collateral damage is all that young man is/was!
I hear ya JB!
Who cares if he died in vain! At least it wasn't one of my family members!

[jbinbny]

I said some people would understand.

And some wouldn't

[steven]

Originally posted by jbinbny
I grieve for that woman. I truly do.

But war is hell.

what war are you referring to?

Her son died in the peace keeping / police mission that is going on in Iraq.

The war ended some time ago.

[Boost Buffalo]

Originally posted by steven
what war are you referring to?

Her son died in the peace keeping / police mission that is going on in Iraq.

The war ended some time ago.

so you feel you know better than the Pentagon?

[therising]

Originally posted by Boost Buffalo
so you feel you know better than the Pentagon?

Apparently you do...see the Base closing ("When is Pork OK")thread.

[WestCoastPerspective]

Get that broken-hearted, broken-minded lady out of Texas!

Can't the President enjoy his MONTH LONG vacation in peace?

The gun-tootin neighbor had it right, shoot tem der trespassas!

[steven]

Originally posted by Boost Buffalo
so you feel you know better than the Pentagon?

Perhaps you arent aware but the govt has been toppled and the country has been conquered. Happened a while ago, should I send you some links so you can verify my sources?
:rolleyes:

The military pays soldiers during war time "combat pay". During peace keeping missions and police duty soldiers are payed "hazerdous duty" pay. Two very seperate things for two very different missions. Since soldiers in Iraq are reciveing hazerdous duty pay and not combat pay it would appear the pentagon agrees with me, unless you know something I dont.

Care to argue that one?
:p

[WestSideJohn]

Originally posted by steven
Care to argue that one?Hey Boost, I'll even get it started for you:

You libs...

[buffy]

Originally posted by jbinbny
I grieve for that woman. I truly do.

But war is hell. I've had friends killed in action and somehow, someway you've got to realize that their's is an ultimate sacrifice

Sometimes I think that only those that have served understand this.

I think we can only honor their memory and win this war they gave their lives for.

Some people on this board wont understand what I'm trying to say.

And some will.

I'll leave it at that!
______________
The military has to provide better equipment and training for these young men, agree? the body armor shortage, jeep shields etc., no excuses, THEY NEED THE BEST EQUIPMENT AVAILABLE, that's the least the military can do...they promise high school boys/girls a bright future for making a wise decision to enlist...how about promising the best PLANNING, protection, training, equipment, trauma care, etc.

All of these dead soldiers can't be helping enrollment, and, oh, (different thread: military recruitment activities).

[WestCoastPerspective]

Originally posted by WestSideJohn
Hey Boost, I'll even get it started for you:

You libs...

:D

[biker]

This loopy woman is tarnishing the memory of her son.

She has succumbed to the "Lois Gibbs" media disease.

News Flash: Her parents and other members of her family disavow her actions.

News Flash 2: Her husband just filed for divorce.


The hard thing for this woman lies ahead; she will be dropped by the media like a hot potatoe in about two weeks, when there's real news to cover.

Will any of her new best buds in the media and MoveOn be around to help her through that tranisition?

Will any of them feel personally responsible for her going completely bonkers when she's left all alone?

[steven]

This "loopy woman" and hundreds like her across america have lost their sons and daughters.

Shame on you.

[biker]

That's exactly why the Admin can't calll her for what she is.

There are not "hundreds like her".

There are hundreds who are bearing their grief with dignity, bringing honor to the sacrifice their sons have made.

The Admin can't speak out, because they know the trap you sprang will spring on them.

But I'm not in the Admin.

I can say what all others know and only some will say.

This woman's susceptibility is being played upon and she will be dropped the moment she stops being useful.

Shame on you!

[atotaltotalfan2001]

Originally posted by biker
That's exactly why the Admin can't calll her for what she is.

There are not "hundreds like her".

There are hundreds who are bearing their grief with dignity, bringing honor to the sacrifice their sons have made.

The Admin can't speak out, because they know the trap you sprang will spring on them.

But I'm not in the Admin.

I can say what all others know and only some will say.

This woman's susceptibility is being played upon and she will be dropped the moment she stops being useful.

Shame on you!

Why is she "loopy?"

She is trying to draw attention to the grief and suffering caused by our occupation of Iraq. She could do it silently, like so many others, but the problem with that silence is it hides a vital fact of war -- the horrible human toll.

I say good for her. She'll be hated by many and be abandoned by the media, as you suggest. But at least, I hope, she'll feel she did all she could to spare other mothers her suffering.

And shame on you, biker, for suggesting that she dishonors those who have served and died by speaking out. That is pure scapegoat-ism!

[WestSideJohn]

Originally posted by atotaltotalfan2001
Why is she "loopy?"Amazing, isn't it? Posters here go ballistic over a quarter percent hike in sales tax but Cindy Sheehan is supposed to stay silent when she loses her son.

[WestCoastPerspective]

Amazing isn't it???

Some of them wanted to even hold a Sheehan-style "rally" in Niagara Square! HAHAHAAH!

[biker]

Shame on you right back!

[buffy]

Bush is sending the message that when one enlists in the military, one may die...accept it, move on , it's an honor

That can sound cold as the numbers get into five digits, especially when Bush is in "clown mode." Bush should be protested for his bad manners and lack of tact, but let's not forget tht Casey put his Mom is this position by enlisting.

[atotaltotalfan2001]

Originally posted by biker
Shame on you right back!

Excellent lack of response.

[WestCoastPerspective]

Shame on the 'LIBERAL' media for not asking the same questions as this mother....As in, why exactly did we fight this war and how do we get out now?

[biker]

You people think Bush is being disrespectful.

I don't .

You people think Sheehan is doing the Lord's work.

I don't.

You and she can do whatever dopey thing you want; as the Prez said, it's a free country.

You can even pretend that lots o' folks think this deranged behavior on her part lends credence to your positions. As a matter of fact, I hope you persist in this absurd belief.

But don't project your whacked-out perceptions onto the President or those of us who support him.

[WestCoastPerspective]

Brainwashed?

[Boost Buffalo]

This poor grieving woman with her misdirected anger is clearly being taken advantage of. You liberals use this as just another means to kick America and kick our president.

[steven]

Originally posted by biker
There are not "hundreds like her".


There is an organizaqtion to which she belongs of hundreds of parents and relatives of dead soldiers that are asking the same questions she is.

I will find the link and post it for you later.

To put this in historical perspective, more american soldiers will be killed in the police action peace/ keeping mission than any other in history

[atotaltotalfan2001]

Originally posted by jbinbny
I said some people would understand.

And some wouldn't

I think they understand your position perfectly. They just don't agree.

[therising]

First of all, most of us (God willing) do not know how we would react if we were to lose a child. To call the woman "loopy" is just a bit cold, and a lot tasteless. She's dealing with the tragedy of losing a son in her own way, so be it.


If anyone here would not be "loopy" after losing a child, please step forward and say so. I will then label you a cold-hearted prick.

Having said that, I do NOT think the President should meet with her. You can't set a precedent of having the President meet with everyone who camps at the side of the road.

[atotaltotalfan2001]

Originally posted by biker
You people think Bush is being disrespectful.

I don't .

You people think Sheehan is doing the Lord's work.

I don't.

You and she can do whatever dopey thing you want; as the Prez said, it's a free country.

You can even pretend that lots o' folks think this deranged behavior on her part lends credence to your positions. As a matter of fact, I hope you persist in this absurd belief.

But don't project your whacked-out perceptions onto the President or those of us who support him.

Huh?

Where did all that come from?

You my friend are putting words in people's mouths. Did someone here mention Sheehan is doing the Lord's work? If so, I can only say I don't agree.

What are these "whacked-out" perceptions of which you speak? That some people find Bush disrespectful for not meeting with Sheehan again?

That's a perfectly reasonable opinion to have; you just disagree with it.

As for Sheehan's "deranged" behavior lending credence to "your positions" -- by which I assume you mean non-supporters of the war -- all I can say is Bush and company are acting pretty worried about that.

Could it be that Bush actually pays attention to polls, sees the declining support for his handling of Iraq, and figures that, combined with this "deranged" Mom of a dead solider, might turn even more of the public against him on this issue?

[biker]

Originally posted by steven

To put this in historical perspective, more american soldiers will be killed in the police action peace/ keeping mission than any other in history

I believe that thing in Korea is officially listed as a "police action".

[speaker]

Originally posted by jbinbny
I grieve for that woman. I truly do.

But war is hell. I've had friends killed in action and somehow, someway you've got to realize that their's is an ultimate sacrifice

Sometimes I think that only those that have served understand this.

I think we can only honor their memory and win this war they gave their lives for.

Some people on this board wont understand what I'm trying to say.

And some will.

I'll leave it at that!

No doubt whatsoever theirs was the ultimate sacrifice.
And tell me after you have raised a child and out your everything into it, to have him told it's for the glory of it, and tell you it's for the glory of it, tell me you UNDERSTAND it. How many thousands more?

[Boost Buffalo]

Originally posted by speaker
No doubt whatsoever theirs was the ultimate sacrifice.
And tell me after you have raised a child and out your everything into it, to have him told it's for the glory of it, and tell you it's for the glory of it, tell me you UNDERSTAND it. How many thousands more?

Perhaps you feel no war is worth it? Do you grieve for all lives lost before their natural end or only when it allows you to belittle your country and your president when your own party is out, lost and wayward?

You take your freedom and liberty for granted.

[speaker]

Wow--where are you coming from, boost, with that totally inappropiate reply?
You are way off the page.

[biker]

I thought it was a totally appropriate reply, from what I can glean from your garbled post.

Besides, who appointed you as the arbiter of appropriate?

How judgemental!

Indeed!

[atotaltotalfan2001]

Originally posted by Boost Buffalo
Perhaps you feel no war is worth it? Do you grieve for all lives lost before their natural end or only when it allows you to belittle your country and your president when your own party is out, lost and wayward?

You take your freedom and liberty for granted.

Why do you assume people who oppose the Iraq war "feel no war is worth it"????

I think most posters are pretty specific about their unhappiness and opposition to THIS war in Iraq, not war in general (although some may be opposed to war in general. So be it. You never know. They might be right)

But I've noticed,BB, that you take the most liberties with accuracy when you feel most threatened.

Is that because you can't really defend your positions, that you quickly revert to attacking your "enemy" so you don't have to make your case based on its merits?

Sounds like a massive case of insecurity to me.

I know that sounds harsh -- but as since you are someone who seems to revel in being harsh, I'm sure you won't mind.

[atotaltotalfan2001]

Originally posted by biker
I thought it was a totally appropriate reply, from what I can glean from your garbled post.

Besides, who appointed you as the arbiter of appropriate?

How judgemental!

Indeed!

Hey! Speaker was just trying to explain the point of view of someone who has lost a child, friend, husband,wife, boyfriend, girlfriend etc. to this war.

What's wrong with that?

Moreover:

Speaker doesn't think BB's response was appropriate. That is Speaker's opinion. He has the right to express it, wouldn't you agree?

I would assume so, since you have no problem letting people know when you think they've posted something inappropriate -- although in your case it seems to be expressed along the lines of "Shame on you" or some variation thereof.

Indeed!

[ERIEMAN]

Because I feel the president is lying to us about his initial intentions for the war in iraq, I sully support sheehan's little protest.

HOWEVER....i'd be willing to bet that she is loopier than a hula hoop.


AUGUST 15--The next well-wisher approaching Cindy Sheehan at her tent encampment outside President George W. Bush's Texas vacation home may actually be a process server. That's because the California woman's husband--in a curious bit of timing--filed for divorce Friday afternoon (below you'll find a copy of Patrick Sheehan's complaint, lodged August 12 in Solano County District Court). With Sheehan, 48, entering a second week outside Bush's Crawford retreat, her husband's divorce petition cites "irreconcilable differences" for the demise of the couple's 28-year marriage (the Sheehans, the document states, have been separated since June 1). Along with a Vacaville home, Patrick Sheehan listed other "community assets" as "any and all benefits payable as a result of son's death," including a Prudential insurance policy and "benefits from the U.S. Government." From her roadside outpost, Sheehan, whose 24-year-old son Casey, an Army Specialist, was killed last year in Iraq, has become the face of the U.S. antiwar movement, telling reporters that she will not budge until Bush meets with her and explains "why our sons are dead." Noting that Bush has referred to the war as a "noble" pursuit, Sheehan told Reuters, "If it's such a noble cause, why aren't his daughters over there?" Through an aide, Patrick Sheehan's lawyer, Glen DeRonde, declined to comment about the court filing, so it is unclear whether the divorce complaint will be delivered to Cindy Sheehan in Texas or when she returns to her home east of San Francisco.

[atotaltotalfan2001]

Originally posted by ERIEMAN
Because I feel the president is lying to us about his initial intentions for the war in iraq, I sully support sheehan's little protest.

HOWEVER....i'd be willing to bet that she is loopier than a hula hoop.


AUGUST 15--The next well-wisher approaching Cindy Sheehan at her tent encampment outside President George W. Bush's Texas vacation home may actually be a process server. That's because the California woman's husband--in a curious bit of timing--filed for divorce Friday afternoon (below you'll find a copy of Patrick Sheehan's complaint, lodged August 12 in Solano County District Court). With Sheehan, 48, entering a second week outside Bush's Crawford retreat, her husband's divorce petition cites "irreconcilable differences" for the demise of the couple's 28-year marriage (the Sheehans, the document states, have been separated since June 1). Along with a Vacaville home, Patrick Sheehan listed other "community assets" as "any and all benefits payable as a result of son's death," including a Prudential insurance policy and "benefits from the U.S. Government." From her roadside outpost, Sheehan, whose 24-year-old son Casey, an Army Specialist, was killed last year in Iraq, has become the face of the U.S. antiwar movement, telling reporters that she will not budge until Bush meets with her and explains "why our sons are dead." Noting that Bush has referred to the war as a "noble" pursuit, Sheehan told Reuters, "If it's such a noble cause, why aren't his daughters over there?" Through an aide, Patrick Sheehan's lawyer, Glen DeRonde, declined to comment about the court filing, so it is unclear whether the divorce complaint will be delivered to Cindy Sheehan in Texas or when she returns to her home east of San Francisco.

Isn't that incredibly sad? I fear for her once she is no longer in the media. I hope she'll find another way to express her protest of the war.

There but for the grace of God....

[ERIEMAN]

Originally posted by atotaltotalfan2001
Isn't that incredibly sad? I fear for her once she is no longer in the media. I hope she'll find another way to express her protest of the war.

There but for the grace of God....

I'd bet that the husband really despises her quest to become a media spectacle. I can't stand women that wear Teva sandals.

[steven]

Originally posted by Boost Buffalo
Perhaps you feel no war is worth it?

Her son didnt die in a war he died in a peace keeping mission

[steven]

Originally posted by biker
I believe that thing in Korea is officially listed as a "police action".

Soldiers in the Korean conflict received combat pay. Since we are using the military as the arbitrator of what is and isn't a war. Its obvious they considered Korea a war. The Korean war medal is called a "war medal" not a "police action" medal.

Additional combat soldiers serving in Korea are authorized combat stripes for there service as well as the CIB. If you where sent to Iraq today you would be eligible for neither.
Police actions and peace keeping duty are best done under a multi national umbrella so many countries share the burden. Not like Iraq where the usa bares 80% GB takes 10% and the other 10% is countries with no real armed forces to speak off just being there for propaganda purposes.

[WestCoastPerspective]

On Saturday, the current President Bush was pressed about how he could be taking five weeks to ride bikes and nap and fish and clear brush even though his occupation of Iraq had become a fiasco. "I think it's also important for me to go on with my life," W. said, "to keep a balanced life."

Pressed about how he could ride his bike while refusing to see a grieving mom of a dead soldier who's camped outside his ranch, he added: "So I'm mindful of what goes on around me. On the other hand, I'm also mindful that I've got a life to live and will do so." :eek:

Ah, the insensitivity of reporters who ask the President Bushes how they can expect to deal with Middle East fighting while they're off fishing.

[Boost Buffalo]

Originally posted by WestCoastPerspective
On Saturday, the current President Bush was pressed about how he could be taking five weeks to ride bikes and nap and fish and clear brush even though his occupation of Iraq had become a fiasco. "I think it's also important for me to go on with my life," W. said, "to keep a balanced life."

Pressed about how he could ride his bike while refusing to see a grieving mom of a dead soldier who's camped outside his ranch, he added: "So I'm mindful of what goes on around me. On the other hand, I'm also mindful that I've got a life to live and will do so." :eek:

Ah, the insensitivity of reporters who ask the President Bushes how they can expect to deal with Middle East fighting while they're off fishing.

hey westcoast, what else did the president say on the subject? You obviously took that way out of context. The president had much more to say on the matter. But you libs try to convert it into a circus event, at the grieving mother's expense.

[WestSideJohn]

<b>Control Board Announces Plan to Return WNY to Solvency</b>

(Buffalo, NY) The two state-appointed control boards overseeing Buffalo and Erie County's troubled finances announced the joint implementation of a plan aimed at returning the area to fiscal solvency. Known as the "Boost Buffalo" plan, it involves chipping in 25 cents every time the words "you libs" appear in a post at the www.speakupwny.com message board. "yeah, we figure those multi-million dollar deficits will be toast sometime around Halloween," stated spokesman N. Aysayer. "There's even talk of continuing the program through Christmas and paying off the national debt while we're at it."

[steven]

Originally posted by Boost Buffalo
But you libs try to convert it into a circus event, at the grieving mother's expense.

How did she get promoted from "looney" to grieving mother?

[therising]

Originally posted by WestSideJohn
<b>Control Board Announces Plan to Return WNY to Solvency</b>

(Buffalo, NY) The two state-appointed control boards overseeing Buffalo and Erie County's troubled finances announced the joint implementation of a plan aimed at returning the area to fiscal solvency. Known as the "Boost Buffalo" plan, it involves chipping in 25 cents every time the words "you libs" appear in a post at the www.speakupwny.com message board. "yeah, we figure those multi-million dollar deficits will be toast sometime around Halloween," stated spokesman N. Aysayer. "There's even talk of continuing the program through Christmas and paying off the national debt while we're at it."

You libs thinks you're funny! :D

[biker]

You libs.....

aren't listening to WBEN and voting.

Their poll this morning is "Do you support the President's policy in Iraq?"

74% say "Yes"

The other seven will be at the Sheehan rally.

[ERIEMAN]

Originally posted by biker
You libs.....

aren't listening to WBEN and voting.

Their poll this morning is "Do you support the President's policy in Iraq?"

74% say "Yes"

The other seven will be at the Sheehan rally.


It should have been worded "do you support the president's continual failure in iraq?

Success should be measured in the number of soldiers that come back alive AFTER the war ended.

[WestCoastPerspective]

Originally posted by biker
You libs.....

aren't listening to WBEN and voting.

Their poll this morning is "Do you support the President's policy in Iraq?"

74% say "Yes"

The other seven will be at the Sheehan rally.

The WBEN poll- now thats a scientific poll! Try this one scooter:

The approval rate for Mr. Bush's handling of Iraq plunged to 34 percent in last weekend's Newsweek poll - a match for the 32 percent that approved L.B.J.'s handling of Vietnam in early March 1968. (The two presidents' overall approval ratings have also converged: 41 percent for Johnson then, 42 percent for Bush now.) On March 31, 1968, as L.B.J.'s ratings plummeted further, he announced he wouldn't seek re-election, commencing our long extrication from that quagmire.

[biker]

That's it.

I'm crushed, defeated, deflated.

You retread Vietnam fellow travellers win!

I agree.


George Bush will not run for re-election.

[biker]

But, the real question would be: would the Bushies be able to act the shameless hypocrites the Dems were?

Clark Clifford, only eight months after being Secy of Defense for LBJ, was testifying in Congress against the despicable Vietnam War.

Only to redeem himself in the 1980s in his portrayal as a doddering old idiot defendant in a stock scam trial.

Lucky for him his co-defendant's wife was Wonder Woman and no one noticed Clark.

Except us truth-tellers.

[atotaltotalfan2001]

Originally posted by ERIEMAN
I'd bet that the husband really despises her quest to become a media spectacle. I can't stand women that wear Teva sandals.

That's cold.

[atotaltotalfan2001]

Originally posted by steven
Her son didnt die in a war he died in a peace keeping mission

True. But it probably felt a lot like a war, what with all the killing and stuff....

[ERIEMAN]

Originally posted by atotaltotalfan2001
That's cold.

how do you figure? I was speculating on his reasons for filing for divorce. While her intentions are good, she looks like a nutbar.

[WestCoastPerspective]

Originally posted by ERIEMAN
how do you figure? I was speculating on his reasons for filing for divorce. While her intentions are good, she looks like a nutbar.

When you don't like the message, attack the messenger. Thats the American way!

[ERIEMAN]

Originally posted by WestCoastPerspective
When you don't like the message, attack the messenger. Thats the American way!

what are you talking about?

do you people have a list of cliches that you copy and paste from? I need that list, if someone would be so kind.

[speaker]

Everone mourns in his or her own way. And the president cannot personally see all of the parents who have lost children in this Iraq war and "peace" keeping effort. The soldiers are doing their best, and the parents of deceased soldiers are doing theirs.
Sheehan is being extreme, but , by her own words, it helped her cope. Now, IMO, she is hurting herself, but helping to drive home the idea that this must end soon.
And by our protesting the US occupancy of Iraq, does not diminish our patriotism or respect and love of our troops, and appreciation of what they are trying to do. But by encouraging young people to "go to Iraq", we are no better than the terrorists who persuade their young people to become suicide bombers.
Now that we are at this place in time, it's a tough call as to how long we should be over there. It could go on indefinitely. But it must end soon.

[atotaltotalfan2001]

Originally posted by ERIEMAN
how do you figure? I was speculating on his reasons for filing for divorce. While her intentions are good, she looks like a nutbar.

She may be a nutbar, but she's obviously deep in pain. I guess I felt you were diminishing her, with seems unfair to me.

[biker]

I've been waiting for someone to bring this up.

Two nights ago, FoxNews had a two hour show "The Heroes of Fallujah" or something like that.

Told about the campaign to retake that safe-haven of the insurgency. Was two hours in length, so it was in production long before Ms. Sheehan.

They followed a Marine company for the week of the campaign. While it contained a lot more, it prominently featured some of the men who were killed during that operation.

Plenty of grieving mothers and fathers. Even one wife who gave birth eerily close to the exact time her husband was killed. These folks weren't cheery, by any means. But they displayed a quiet sense of dignity that honored the sacrifice their sons/husbands made.

These volunteers were not dumb kids who didn't have any idea what they were getting into. They were mature adults who made a concious decision to defend the rest of us. Many of them were part of the production, as it was a "real time" production.

These people who knew this was a tough assignment and weren't there for the "glory" of it.

They were there because they thought this forward action is worthwhile.

And so do a lot of their fellow citizens.

[ERIEMAN]

Originally posted by atotaltotalfan2001
She may be a nutbar, but she's obviously deep in pain. I guess I felt you were diminishing her, with seems unfair to me.

no, man...i completely and totally agree with what she is saying. I feel the president should address her personally and privately. She wants closure, and he sent her son under false pretenses and he owes her an explanation. He owes everyone an explanation.

That does not take away from the possibility that she is nuts. There has to be a reason that her husband wants a divorce, and i would imagine it would be her insistence on becomign a media spectacle in the midst of deep personal and family pain.

Of course, there's always the things we don't know about, like her hidden agenda.

[biker]

Originally posted by ERIEMAN
he sent her son under false pretenses and he owes her an explanation. He owes everyone an explanation.



No he didn't and no he doesn't.

[ERIEMAN]

Originally posted by biker
No he didn't and no he doesn't.

Didnt we go through this already in countless other thread?

Why did we go?
Did we find any?
Did he "flip flop" after none were found?
Does he continue to paint a rosy picture of the situation?
Is it rosy?

[WestSideJohn]

And here's another point I've yet to see addressed. We're told that the Bush administration did <i>not</i> mislead us in making the case for war, that they were simply fooled by "bad intelligence" from the CIA.

If this is true, why haven't heads rolled?

[Boost Buffalo]

Originally posted by WestSideJohn
<b>Control Board Announces Plan to Return WNY to Solvency</b>

(Buffalo, NY) The two state-appointed control boards overseeing Buffalo and Erie County's troubled finances announced the joint implementation of a plan aimed at returning the area to fiscal solvency. Known as the "Boost Buffalo" plan, it involves chipping in 25 cents every time the words "you libs" appear in a post at the www.speakupwny.com message board. "yeah, we figure those multi-million dollar deficits will be toast sometime around Halloween," stated spokesman N. Aysayer. "There's even talk of continuing the program through Christmas and paying off the national debt while we're at it."

Westside , thats a scream... good humor,...and I know that spokesman. he has a lot of relatives.

So,

Rep is to Republican
as
Lib is to Liberal

everything's cool :cool:

[atotaltotalfan2001]

Originally posted by biker
I've been waiting for someone to bring this up.

Two nights ago, FoxNews had a two hour show "The Heroes of Fallujah" or something like that.

Told about the campaign to retake that safe-haven of the insurgency. Was two hours in length, so it was in production long before Ms. Sheehan.

They followed a Marine company for the week of the campaign. While it contained a lot more, it prominently featured some of the men who were killed during that operation.

Plenty of grieving mothers and fathers. Even one wife who gave birth eerily close to the exact time her husband was killed. These folks weren't cheery, by any means. But they displayed a quiet sense of dignity that honored the sacrifice their sons/husbands made.

These volunteers were not dumb kids who didn't have any idea what they were getting into. They were mature adults who made a concious decision to defend the rest of us. Many of them were part of the production, as it was a "real time" production.

These people who knew this was a tough assignment and weren't there for the "glory" of it.

They were there because they thought this forward action is worthwhile.

And so do a lot of their fellow citizens.

Sure. But that doesn't negate those who disagree or Sheehan, IMO, for taking a very public stand.

[atotaltotalfan2001]

Originally posted by ERIEMAN
no, man...i completely and totally agree with what she is saying. I feel the president should address her personally and privately. She wants closure, and he sent her son under false pretenses and he owes her an explanation. He owes everyone an explanation.

That does not take away from the possibility that she is nuts. There has to be a reason that her husband wants a divorce, and i would imagine it would be her insistence on becomign a media spectacle in the midst of deep personal and family pain.

Of course, there's always the things we don't know about, like her hidden agenda.

Oh, I misunderstood you. Sorry about that. She might be nuts, if not before then now. I read the stress caused by the son's death was too much for the marriage. I imagine taking a public stand her husband probably didn't agree with was the final straw.

But you're right....there is probably a lot we don't know and some hidden agendas.

[WestCoastPerspective]

Is Biker going to explain why the Iraq war was "worthwhile" to all of us skeptics?

[biker]

There's nothing I could say that would get through to you ideologues.

I've got better things to do.

I've got to come up with a few union-busting ideas to ruin Citymouse's break this evening.

Slip in a cost overrun or two in one of Boost's mega-projects.

Or single-handedly close down the NF airbase.:p

[avet]

quote:
Yassin al-Sammerai was not. On 14 July, the second grade schoolboy had gone to spend the night with two college friends and - this being a city without electricity in the hottest month of the year - they decided to spend the night sleeping in the front garden. Let his broken 65 year-old father Selim take up the story, for he's the one who still cannot believe his son is dead - or what the Americans told him afterwards.
"It was three-thirty in the morning and they were all asleep, Yassin and his friends Fahed and Walid Khaled. There was an American patrol outside and then suddenly, a Bradley armoured vehicle burst through the gate and wall and drove over Yassin. You know how heavy these things are. He died instantly. But the Americans didn't know what they'd done. He was lying crushed under the vehicle for 17 minutes. Um Khaled, his friends' mother, kept shouting in Arabic: "There is a boy under this vehicle!"
According to Selim al-Sammerai, the Americans' first reaction was to put handcuffs on the two other boys. But a Lebanese Arabic interpreter working for the Americans arrived to explain that it was all a mistake. "We don't have anything against you," she said. The Americans produced a laminated paper in English and Arabic entitled "Iraqi Claims Pocket Card" which tells them how to claim compensation.
The unit whose Bradley drove over Yassin is listed as "256 BCT A/156 AR, Mortars". Under "Type of Incident", an American had written: "Raid destroyed gate and doors." No one told the family there had been a raid. And nowhere - but nowhere - on the form does it suggest that the "raid" destroyed the life of the football-loving Yassin al-Sammerai.
"The Americans came back with an officer two days later," Selim al-Sammerai continues. "They offered us compensation. I refused. I lost my son, I told the officer. 'I don't want the money - I don't think the money will bring back my son.' That's what I told the American." There is a long silence in the room. But Selim, who is still crying, insists on speaking again.

"I told the American officer:
'You have killed the innocent and such things will lead the people to destroy you and the people will make a revolution against you.

You said you had come to liberate us from the previous regime. But you are destroying our walls and doors.'"
_______________________________________________

How can the US Ever Win this War, when the majority of the People that die each and everyday in Iraq are Innocent Civilans - most of the time Children.
How do you Expect the Iraq Father to Forget such an "Accident"?
Would You, as a Father, Forget it?
________________________________________________

Bush saying that the U.S. and its allies will win this war by...
........ "capturing the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people"
________________________________________________

How secure are the people when tax dollars get "siphoned" into the MILITARY instead of ...social causes?

_______________________________________________
Bush is going to make us "SAFER" from terrorists - BY KEEPING OUR BORDERS "WIDE OPEN" TO ANYBODY - TERRORISTS, DRUG SMUGGLERS, ILLEGALS, MURDERERS, etc.,... ?????
------"MISSION ACCOMPLISHED"--------------

www.chicagotribune.com
NOGALES, Ariz. -- Saying their states are reeling from growing drug trafficking and illegal migration, the governors of Arizona and New Mexico have declared states of emergency along their borders with Mexico.

Gov. Janet Napolitano of Arizona has freed up $1.5 million in disaster funds to assist state agencies and border counties while New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson defended his recent decision to declare an emergency, saying states must take security into their own hands because the...
............. federal government has FAILED to fix the problem.
______________________________________________

from: The Profits of Fear

George Orwell suggested in his novel 1984 that a totalitarian state would benefit most from a war which seems threatening yet is never sufficiently dangerous to defeat the nation and can be prolonged almost indefinitely. An ongoing conflict of this type provides an outlet for destructive energy and justifies material sacrifices while discouraging dissent.

I saw George Bush Junior standing on an aircraft carrier, dressed like an Air Force pilot, shouting “Bring it on!” And unlike his father, he didn’t look depressed at all, even though he was ordering thousands of young soldiers into a conflict that was quite capable of killing them, while threatening to undo all the prosperity that we had created for ourselves during our freedom from fear.

My only question is why this fear-based charade still works, and I guess the answer is that the fear makes us STUPID enough to allow it to work.
____________________________________________

SPEAKING OF "PROFITS" - THIS JUST DON'T HAPPEN HERE,....RIGHT??

Cunningham defends deal with defense firm's owner
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/politics/20050612-9999-1n12windfall.html

WASHINGTON – A defense contractor with ties to Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham took a $700,000 loss on the purchase of the congressman's Del Mar house while the congressman, a member of the influential defense appropriations subcommittee, was supporting the contractor's efforts to get tens of millions of dollars in contracts from the Pentagon.

Mitchell Wade bought the San Diego Republican's house for $1,675,000 in November 2003 and put it back on the market almost immediately for roughly the same price. But the Del Mar house languished unsold and vacant for 261 days before selling for $975,000.

Meanwhile, Cunningham used the proceeds of the $1,675,000 sale to buy a $2.55 million house in Rancho Santa Fe. And Wade, who had been suffering through a flat period in winning Pentagon contracts, was on a tear – reeling in tens of millions of dollars in defense and intelligence-related contracts.

But in 2003 and 2004, roughly around the time of the house transaction, MZM's fortunes began to soar. In fiscal year 2003, it received $41 million in defense contracts. Since then, MZM has added tens of millions of dollars in additional contracts, including a $5 million sole source contract to provide interpreters in Iraq.

In 2004, MZM had $66 million in revenues, according to Washington Technology magazine, which put the relative corporate newcomer on its 2005 list of "Top 100 Federal Prime Contractors."

Cunningham said he couldn't discuss the MZM programs he's helped advance becausethey are "very, very classified."

Brumett, the MZM official, refused to discuss any of MZM's contracting activities, saying,"It's government proprietary information and it's also classified."

[steven]

Originally posted by avet
"It was three-thirty in the morning and they were all asleep, Yassin and his friends Fahed and Walid Khaled. There was an American patrol outside and then suddenly, a Bradley armoured vehicle burst through the gate and wall and drove over Yassin. [/B]

A bfv weighs in at several tons, it doesn't "sneak up" on anyone. additionally mech patrols at the smallest level are 4 vehicles. (Platoon size). A raid as described would be a company size unit with at least 16 BFV's and there accompaniments of 2 1/2 ton trucks hummers etc. When Bradley's are rolling across the terrain the ground trembles and its extremely loud. You can hear a mech platoon over a mile away, a company much farther. From my point of view the story is a little suspect as written

It is however very likely they ran over someone and didn't know it. Mine ran over a car once and it just felt like a bump in the road.

[avet]

HEADLINE:
"U.S. considers seizing revenues to pay for occupation, source says"

BUT WHO, SOFAR, HAS BEEN "PAYING" FOR THE WAR - TAXPAYERS !!

WHO, SOFAR, IS "PROFITING VERY,VERY,VERY BIG" FROM THE WAR - *BETCHEL, HALLIBURTON,CARLYLE GROUP,ETC., ....
________________________________________________

MEGA TAXDOLLARS ARE GOING TO THESE CO'S, "SUPPOSEDLY" TO

"...rehabilitation of Iraq’s power, water and sewage systems"
________________________________________________

--------------YET, YEARS LATER---------------------

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SAMAWA, Iraq (Reuters) - Hundreds of Iraqis angry at poor public services rioted in the town of Samawa south of Baghdad on Sunday and police opened fire on the crowd, killing one person and wounding 40, hospital sources and witnesses said.

THEY WERE PROTESTING BECAUSE OF A LACK OF .... "WATER & ELECTRICITY".
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

WHERE'S ANY ...."SACRIFICE", WHATSOEVER, ON "THEIR*" PART ????

WHY ARE "THEY", BEING CONNECTED "DIRECTLY" TO THIS ADMINISTRATION ......PROFITING (the "only" ones, I might add) ????

WE HAVE TO SACRIFICE OUR TAXES, OUR LIVES, & OUR ....."RIGHTS" !!!

-------YET------

Executive Order 13303, issued on May 22, 2003, claims to be ESSENTIOAL to Iraqi reconstruction efforts.
A cursory reading of the Order indicates that its real purpose is to protect oil companies by giving virtual IMPUNITY for ANY activities undertaken relating to Iraqi oil.
Under this Order, an oil company complicit in human rights violations, or one that causes environmental damage, would be IMMUNE from lawsuits.
The language of the Executive Order is so broad that it might as well have been written by lawyers for Halliburton, ExxonMobil and ChevronTexaco.

On April 17 the US Agency for International Development (USAID) awarded a contract worth $680 million to Bechtel Corp., a private company with close ties to the Republican Party and the Bush administration.

The outcome of a secretive bidding process open only to a select group of American corporations, the contract is the latest and largest in a series of windfalls for corporate America following the overthrow of the Saddam Hussein regime.

The areas covered by the contract include the rehabilitation of Iraq’s power, water and sewage systems that were destroyed in the bombing campaign, rehabilitation of airports, and the dredging of the Umm Qasr port. Bechtel’s future work in the country will also likely include repair and reconstruction of hospitals, schools, government buildings and irrigation and transportation systems.
____________________________________________
Bechtel stands to gain much more than the initial contract. USAID officials have indicated that the final price tag will run into the tens of billions of dollars. Much of this work—which includes operations in nearly every important area of the country’s infrastructure—will go to Bechtel and its subcontractors. “This has never been done before—an American corporation rebuilding an entire foreign country,” noted Daniel Brian, Executive director of Project of Government Oversight, which is based in Washington DC.

Previous contracts included a multi-billion dollar deal secured by Halliburton, a company previously headed by Vice President Dick Cheney. The cost-plus-profit contract was awarded without competition to Halliburton’s subsidiary, Brown & Root, which was also one of the six original contenders for the contract awarded to Bechtel. Brown & Root eventually opted out of the bidding process after charges of favoritism were raised.

Cheney still receives up to $1 MILLION A YEAR from
Halliburton as part of his severance package.
________________________________________________

What will be the character of such a “future Iraqi government?” Bush and other administration officials insist that their aim is to “liberate” the Iraqi people and bring them ......“democracy”.

But forcing the Iraqi people to pay for the military occupation of their country and accept the transfer of the nation’s oil wealth to Chevron, Exxon and Occidental cannot be accomplished ....."democratically".
The strategic aims that Washington is pursuing will require a neo-colonial puppet dictatorship, backed by hundreds of thousands of American troops.

All of the evidence indicates that the only deadly terrorist attacks since September 11, 2001 and the only use of chemical weapons on US soil had their origins within the national security apparatus of the US government ITSELF.
The government’s role in relation to this act of terrorism is characterized by conspiracy and cover-up.

It should further be noted that the US government has NEVER, undertaken a serious investigation into the terror attacks of September 11, 2001. It has NEVER offered the American people an explanation of precisely what happened, and how the perpetrators were able to carry out their crime DESPITE "MASSIVE" US surveillance of bin Laden and his cohorts.
The lack of any such accounting not only reeks of cover-up and possible complicity, it also makes a mockery of the government’s current claims to be motivated purely by concerns for the "safety and security" of the American people.
____________________________________________

More than $1.4 BILLION of financial transactions have gone from the House of Saud to corporations and institutions tied to the Bushes and their allies - largely to companies such as the
Carlyle Group,Halliburton , and HarkenEnergy.
____________________________________________

[captjacksparrow]

She has every right to protest, this is America, ya know.

I don't agree with her reasons nor the tactics involved.

She is not the only mother that has lost a son in a conflict, nor will she be the last one.

IF she felt this strongly about the conflict in Iraq before her son went over, all she had to do was drive him to Mexico or Canada, and support him to live there. He'd be awol in the US but he'd be alive.

Heck, if every parent did that, we wouldn't have to worry about sending our troops anywhere.

We could just sit back and watch Jong,Shwe,Shintao,al-Qaddafi,Niyazov,
Nguema,Kabila, Castro,Al-Assad, and many other dictators just deal with the world by their ways and means.

Perhaps the US should close all the military installations in Germany,Italy, Japan, Portugal, Saudi Arabia, South Korea, Turkey, UK, Belgium, Guam,Netherlands, Iceland, Bahrain,Greece, Spain, Diego Garcia(Indian Ocean)...we should could save a lot of money! For social programs. Which program would we start with? Welfare?

Do you really think that all the protesters on Bush's ranch are going to do anything to change the US's positioin on Iraq? All the protest is doing, is drawing other protesters to the ranch, each with their own agenda. For the war, against the war...

I wish Mrs. Sullivan were alive today, so she could talk to Crawford and tell her what is is like to lose not 1, but 5 sons to a war.


No one wants to bury their child. That's human nature. Is the death of a child any different if it is a war, illness, or accident?

[biker]

Very thoughtful.

[avet]

IF she felt this strongly about the conflict in Iraq before her son went over, all she had to do was drive him to Mexico or Canada, and support him to live there. He'd be awol
Do you mean use the ..."Bush AWOL tatics", when confronted with serving your country?

IF the adminstration felt this STRONGLY about the conflict in Iraq, why are NONE their children serving? The sacrifice too much for "them"?


Do you really think that all the protesters on Bush's ranch are going to do anything to change the US's positioin on Iraq? All the protest is doing, is drawing other protesters to the ranch
Just "hate" to break up his little vacation, but ......YES.
(btw - it's a "fact" that GWB has taken more "vacation time" than any other president - esp. during all these "crisis" times - *color coded homeland threats are not optional during his "vacation time")


Is the death of a child any different if it is a war, illness, or accident?
illness - NO

accident - NO

war - WERE "NOT" AT WAR - YES !!

[avet]

I'M SURE THIS IS EXPLAINED TO THE "POSSIBLE" NEW RECRUITS THEY HARRASS IN "PUBLIC" HIGH SCHOOLS & THEIR HOMES (all being of low income families) RIGHT AFTER THEY SHOW EM' VIDEOS & VIDEO GAMES OF ....
"BE ALL YOU CAN BE" & EMPHASIZE THAT THEY NEED TO DO THEIR "PATRIOTIC DUTY" IN ORDER TO GET A BETTER EDUCATION FOR THEMSELVES. IT'S THEIR "ONLY" OPTION (not being born into a "have more" family).

________________________________________________

As ailing Gulf War Heroes from all 27 coalition countries slowly die of “unknown causes,” they wait for answers from their respective governments…
but NO "SATISFYING" or even "CREDIBLE" answers have come forth from the military establishment.

Records that span over a decade point to negligence and even culpability on the part of the U.S. Department of Defense and their “disposable army” mentality.

The VA has determined that 250,000 troops are now permanently disabled, 15,000 troops are dead and over 425,000 are ill and slowly dying from what the Department of Defense still calls a “mystery disease.”

How many more will have to die before action is taken?
______________________________________________

[therising]

he sent her son under false pretenses and he owes her an explanation. He owes everyone an explanation

IMO, Yes her did, but No he doesn't.

I hope I explain this correctly, but I think that when you volunteer in the Armed Services, you almost lose your right to an explanation - Your's is to do or die, and not ask why.

[WestCoastPerspective]

That Scooter/WBEN poll was sure on the money:


A clear sign of Bush's failure to communicate effectively about Iraq comes from the pollsters. Newsweek and Associated Press polls taken in early August measured his job approval rating at 42 percent, the lowest level ever. Approval of his handling of Iraq was even lower -- 34 percent in Newsweek's sampling, 38 percent in the AP's. Anyone who doesn't think Vietnam when he sees those numbers doesn't have a good memory.

Scoots: Comments? Questions? Excuses?

[WestSideJohn]

I agree - the President doesn't owe any one particular person an explanation for their son's death in combat. I do, however, think he's making a huge tactical error by ignoring Cindy Sheehan. He could make this whole thing go away just by meeting with her for 10 minutes. She might not like what he tells her, in fact I can guarantee that she won't, but her demand will have been met, and that would be a huge blow to the public's interest in this story. She's playing him like a fiddle and for some reason he's letting her.

[ERIEMAN]

Originally posted by WestSideJohn
I agree - the President doesn't owe any one particular person an explanation for their son's death in combat. I do, however, think he's making a huge tactical error by ignoring Cindy Sheehan. He could make this whole thing go away just by meeting with her for 10 minutes. She might not like what he tells her, in fact I can guarantee that she won't, but her demand will have been met, and that would be a huge blow to the public's interest in this story. She's playing him like a fiddle and for some reason he's letting her.

thats exactly why im saying he should talk to her privately.

[biker]

No he shouldn't.

This whole phenomenom is totally attributable to its being staged during the August doldrums.

The 24 hour news cycle is still there, but Washington is empty.

This goes away when there's something of substance to fill the 24x7 "content" vacuum.

Now, I'll take my own advice and ignore this.

[speaker]

Originally posted by biker
...................
"This whole phenomenom is totally attributable to its being staged during the August doldrums..........


This goes away when there's something of substance to fill the 24x7 "content" vacuum."


you are something.
spoken like a true a, er, well...... bush person. :rolleyes:

[captjacksparrow]

No, the recruiting teams DO NOT HARASS the children in public schools.

The military recruiting officers cannot come into public schools at any time. They are under the same guidelines as us parents are. We have to go through security to enter the school and make an appointment to see whoever it is we have to see.

The recruits come into the high schools during their career week, and have structured presentations, along with all the other career instructors. The children sign up for what careers they are interested in and the kids move about to at least 3 different career choices during the day or days.

The HS hands out forms to the parents to sign if they do not want the military to call their homes. This only applies to boys after they hit age 16. I forgot to sign my son's form and we get phone calls weekly. AND WE ARE NOT LOW INCOME(Where did you get this one from?)

[captjacksparrow]

If the President would meet with her, he'd only open a can of worms for himself.

Every freaking protester from A-Z would make it a point that their program was the most important agenda in the world. It'd be shoved in our face by the media whether we like it or not.

I can see it now. Squeaky Fromm and Charles Manson members sitting on the Presidents grounds, wanting to free them.(believe me, there are those that want to free them)

it could happen

[WestSideJohn]

The can of worms was opened years ago when Mr. Bush decided to invade another nation pre-emptively based on false information and without sufficient planning for keeping the peace.

The chicken(hawks) have come home to roost, people. A third of the country and the overwhelming majority of the rest of the world were telling you "hey, this doesn't add up" but you didn't want to hear it. So you labeled us as Saddam-loving traitors and went ahead with your poorly-conceived invasion. Well, turns out you were wrong, and we were right, and you're ticked off about that. Well, imagine how ticked off we are.

The worst part is that nobody seems to be learning a lesson from any of this, which practically guarantees it will happen again, and maybe someday soon. People are dying (oh, sorry LHardy I didn't mean to be a selfish whiner) and $1 billion is being spent each month on this debacle and the biggest worry of some here is that the President might lose face or set a precedent if he meets with a grieving mother for five minutes.

God bless America. We need it.

[Linda_D]

I think this op-ed piece pretty well sums my feelings about Bush and the Iraq war:



Blood Runs Red, Not Blue

By BOB HERBERT
Published: August 18, 2005

You have to wonder whether reality ever comes knocking on George W. Bush's door. If it did, would the president with the unsettling demeanor of a boy king even bother to answer? Mr. Bush is the commander in chief who launched a savage war in Iraq and now spends his days happily riding his bicycle in Texas.

This is eerie. Scary. Surreal.

The war is going badly and lives have been lost by the thousands, but there is no real sense, either at the highest levels of government or in the nation at large, that anything momentous is at stake. The announcement on Sunday that five more American soldiers had been blown to eternity by roadside bombs was treated by the press as a yawner. It got very little attention.

You can turn on the television any evening and tune in to the bizarre extended coverage of the search for Natalee Holloway, the Alabama teenager who disappeared in Aruba in May. But we hear very little about the men and women who have given up their lives in Iraq, or are living with horrific injuries suffered in that conflict.

If only the war were more entertaining. Less of a downer. Perhaps then we could meet the people who are suffering and dying in it.

For all the talk of supporting the troops, they are a low priority for most Americans. If the nation really cared, the president would not be frolicking at his ranch for the entire month of August. He'd be back in Washington burning the midnight oil, trying to figure out how to get the troops out of the terrible fix he put them in.

Instead, Mr. Bush is bicycling as soldiers and marines are dying. Dozens have been killed since he went off on his vacation.

As for the rest of the nation, it's not doing much for the troops, either. There was a time, long ago, when war required sacrifices that were shared by most of the population. That's over.

I was in Jacksonville, Fla., a few days ago and watched in amusement as a young woman emerged from a restaurant into 95-degree heat and gleefully exclaimed, "All right, let's go shopping!" The war was the furthest thing from her mind.

For the most part, the only people sacrificing for this war are the troops and their families, and very few of them are coming from the privileged economic classes. That's why it's so easy to keep the troops out of sight and out of mind. And it's why, in the third year of a war started by the richest nation on earth, we still get stories like the one in Sunday's Times that began:

"For the second time since the Iraq war began, the Pentagon is struggling to replace body armor that is failing to protect American troops from the most lethal attacks by insurgents."

Scandalous incompetence? Appalling indifference? Try both. Who cares? This is a war fought mostly by other people's children. The loudest of the hawks are the least likely to send their sons or daughters off to Iraq.

The president has never been clear about why we're in Iraq. There's no plan, no strategy. In one of the many tragic echoes of Vietnam, U.S. troops have been fighting hellacious battles to seize areas controlled by insurgents, only to retreat and allow the insurgents to return.

If Mr. Bush were willing to do something he has refused to do so far - speak plainly and honestly to the American people about this war - he might be able to explain why U.S. troops should continue with an effort that is, in large part at least, benefiting Iraqi factions that are murderous, corrupt and terminally hostile to women. If by some chance he could make that case, the next appropriate step would be to ask all Americans to do their part for the war effort.

College kids in the U.S. are playing video games and looking forward to frat parties while their less fortunate peers are rattling around like moving targets in Baghdad and Mosul, trying to dodge improvised explosive devices and rocket-propelled grenades.

There is something very, very wrong with this picture.

If the war in Iraq is worth fighting - if it's a noble venture, as the hawks insist it is - then it's worth fighting with the children of the privileged classes. They should be added to the combat mix. If it's not worth their blood, then we should bring the other troops home.

If Mr. Bush's war in Iraq is worth dying for, then the children of the privileged should be doing some of the dying.

[jbinbny]

Originally posted by buffy
Bush is sending the message that when one enlists in the military, one may die...accept it, move on , it's an honor

That can sound cold as the numbers get into five digits, especially when Bush is in "clown mode." Bush should be protested for his bad manners and lack of tact, but let's not forget tht Casey put his Mom is this position by enlisting.


That is exactly right. He was not drafted and joined the military for the GI Bill and other benefits.

But when you enlist it says quite clearly that if your so ordered you will go and fight and possibly die.

This woman is grieving and I understand that.

But her son made an adult decsion to join. She needs to understand that and try and move on with her life.

And stop making a spectacle of herself!

[crlachepinochet]

Originally posted by captjacksparrow
No, the recruiting teams DO NOT HARASS the children in public schools.

The military recruiting officers cannot come into public schools at any time. They are under the same guidelines as us parents are. We have to go through security to enter the school and make an appointment to see whoever it is we have to see.

The recruits come into the high schools during their career week, and have structured presentations, along with all the other career instructors. The children sign up for what careers they are interested in and the kids move about to at least 3 different career choices during the day or days.

The HS hands out forms to the parents to sign if they do not want the military to call their homes. This only applies to boys after they hit age 16. I forgot to sign my son's form and we get phone calls weekly. AND WE ARE NOT LOW INCOME(Where did you get this one from?)

I'd run out of fingers and toes before I could count the number of days in even a semester where there were recruiters in my the cafeteria of my HS. They set up a table with pamphlets and whatnot, and if "business" was slow, they would walk around and talk to people. There's also the ASVAB test, which is as sure of a way as there is to get military recruiters hounding you at home!

[avet]

This "was" my still unanswered question:

I'M SURE THIS IS EXPLAINED TO THE .....
________________________________________________

As ailing Gulf War Heroes from all 27 coalition countries slowly die of “unknown causes,” they wait for answers from their respective governments…
but NO "SATISFYING" or even "CREDIBLE" answers have come forth from the military establishment.
Records that span over a decade point to negligence and even culpability on the part of the U.S. Department of Defense and their “disposable army” mentality.
The VA has determined that 250,000 troops are now permanently disabled, 15,000 troops are dead and over 425,000 are ill and slowly dying from what the Department of Defense still calls a “mystery disease.”
How many more will have to die before action is taken?
______________________________________________

Is this "fact" explained to potential recruits ? (waste of my time asking, but I think it is a very big , very pertainent "fact" most kids aren't aware of before signing on the dotted line)

Do you explain the ACTUAL "support"(cuts) Bush really gives them ??

_______________________________________________

"The House of Representatives have recently voted on the 2004 budget which will cut funding for veteran's health care and benefit programs by nearly $25 billion over the next ten years. It narrowly passed by a vote of 215 to 212, and came just a day after Congress passed a resolution to "Support Our Troops."" How exactly does this vote support our troops? Does leaving our current and future veterans veterans without access to health care and compensation qualify as supporting them? " "The Veteran's Administration, plagued by recent budget cuts, has had to resort to charging new veterans entering into its system a yearly fee of $250 in order for them to receive treatment. It is a sad irony that the very people being sent to fight the war are going to have to pay to treat the effects of it. "
Veterans and their families will sadly begin finding that they have no place to turn for their medical treatment as V.A. hospitals across the country face closing their doors.
The Bush Administration recently ordered V.A. medical centers to stop publicizing available benefits to veterans seeking assistance. This follows discontinued enrollments of some eligible veterans for healthcare benefits as of January, 2003.

Bush Administration funding cuts will also prevent veterans from receiving their disability pensions.

Nearly a third of Gulf War veterans, about 209,000 veterans, have submitted claims to to the VA for disability. The backlog of unprocessed claims has reached the astronomical count of 489,297, a number which is unfortunately increasing all of time. There are also currently 500,000 Compensation and Pension cases still pending.

Making matters worse, forty percent of Vietnam Veterans are homeless. They went from the jungles of the war to the jungles of the street. Before President Bush decided to declare war, maybe he ought to have considered correcting this situation first. How many current veterans will return home, only to find themselves in the same situation?

And today we are told that we must "Support Our Troops." "Wear a yellow ribbon, wave your flag, support the Bush Administration's War on Terror and War on Iraq." Questioning the war is equated with deserting our troops or treason. And yet how are the warmongers supporting our troops? By eliminating their healthcare and slashing their pensions. Let us support the warrior without supporting the war.
__________________________________________

“Seeing the care that these troops get is comforting for me and Laura. We should and must provide the best care for anybody who is willing to put their life in harm's way.”
– President Bush, 1/17/03

-----THE EXACT VERY SAME DAY:

The President made these comments on the same day that his Administration announced it was cutting off access to its health care system for approximately 164,000 veterans. The Administration also is pushing a cut of $1.5 billion in military housing/medical facility funding, despite the fact that UPI reports “hundreds of sick and wounded U.S. soldiers including many who served in the Iraq war are languishing in hot cement barracks here while they wait - sometimes for months - to see doctors.”
– Wash Post, 1/17/03, UPI, 10/17/03

“Your lives can be changed in a moment with the sudden call to duty. I want to thank you for your willingness to heed that important call, and I want to thank your families. I want to thank your sons, daughters, husbands and wives who share in your sacrifice, who are willing to sacrifice for our country and who stand behind you.”
– President Bush to National Guard and Reserves, 10/9/03

------YET--------

A recent General Accounting Office report estimated that one of every five Guard members has no health insurance.”
– Gannett News Service, 10/23/03

“The services and the Joint Staff have been working with Central Command to develop a rotation plan so that we can, in fact, see that we treat these terrific young men and young women in a way that's respectful of their lives and their circumstances.”
– Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, 7/9/03

---BUT WHAT DO THEY ACTUALLY DO TO THESE "terrific young men and young women"

“Troops were told they'd be going home in May. Then in early July. Then late July.” Then Rumsfeld said August. Then officials changed the story again, saying “they could make no hard promises.” Then the Pentagon announced for the first time since Vietnam, they might “have to start serving back-to-back overseas tours of up to a year.” Then Secretary of State Colin Powell said some troops would probably be serving at least another year in Iraq. And now the Pentagon acknowledges that the “United States will have to provide the overwhelming majority of the occupying troops indefinitely.”
– ABC News, 7/16/03, USA Today, 8/24/03, Figaro, 10/24/03, NY Times, 10/27/03

“I want to make sure that our soldiers have the best possible pay.”
– President Bush, 1/3/03

-----THEN-------

“The Bush administration announced that on Oct. 1 it wants to roll back recent modest increases in monthly imminent-danger pay (from $225 to $150) and family-separation allowance (from $250 to $100) for troops getting shot at in combat zones.”
– Army Times, 6/30/03

“I want to make sure the housing is the best possible for our military families.”
– President Bush, 1/3/03

------NOPE, NOT ON MY WATCH------

The Bush's 2004 budget proposes a $1.5 billion reduction in funds to military family housing/medical facilities – a 14% cut.
– Bush FY 2004 Budget

"I twice led the Congress to pass historic tax relief for the American people. We wanted tax relief to be as broad and as fair as possible, so we reduced taxes on everyone who pays taxes.”
– President Bush, 10/16/03

-------YEAH, A CERTAIN "FEW" GOT MAJOR TAX BREAKS - THE "RICHEST IN THE LAND" WHO WOULDN'T KNOW A "HOSPITAL CORNER" IF THEY SLEPT ON IT.

“One million children living in military and veteran families are being denied child tax credit help” in President Bush's tax cut. “More than 260,000 of these children have parents on active military duty.”
– Children's Defense Fund, 6/6/03

[Boost Buffalo]

Originally posted by WestCoastPerspective
Is Biker going to explain why the Iraq war was "worthwhile" to all of us skeptics?

thats clever, Westcoastlib, how did you ever think up that question. surprised it hasnt been addressed a dozen times already...thats an original for sure:rolleyes:

[speaker]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by avet
[B]This "was" my still unanswered question:

I'M SURE THIS IS EXPLAINED TO THE .....
________________________________________________

As ailing Gulf War Heroes from all 27 coalition countries slowly die of “unknown causes,” they wait for answers from their respective governments…
but NO "SATISFYING" or even "CREDIBLE" answers have come forth from the military establishment.
Records that span over a decade point to negligence and even culpability on the part of the U.S. Department of Defense and their “disposable army” mentality.
The VA has determined that 250,000 troops are now permanently disabled, 15,000 troops are dead and over 425,000 are ill and slowly dying from what the Department of Defense still calls a “mystery disease.”
How many more will have to die before action is taken?
______________________________________________

My friend's soldier son died of cancer, a year after he was sent home from Afghanistan, ill and barely able to move. His family was "reimbursed", as if it could do that, a fair sum. Don't know how much but enough to make a person realize that something was wrong. His best friend in the army also died with the same diagnosis several months before. The reason? US used "dirty" bombs in Afghanistan. The very same that we are warned of being used by the terrorists on the US. This is the "mystery disease". No wonder they all want us out of there. And we can worry for decades to come because of our breaking the international rules of war and the UN knows this. Wants nothing to do with it.

[avet]

It's very clever the way you, having "never" served, & never will serve, sit home & make easy money from a highly "questionable" company, & wave your flag so much "higher", while others are doing the dying for it.

Seeing you know absolutely "nothing" about being a "patriotic" vet, try answering some of these questions. They "are" within your scope of experience, being a "profit" maker in Halliburton.

ANY "WHISTLEBLOWING" WHATSOEVER WILL .....NOT BE TOLORATED !

WHY ??!!!!!!

WHAT ARE "THEY" SO AFRAID OF - IF IT'S ALL "LIGIT" ?????!!!!!!!!!
______________________________

Bunnatine ``Bunny'' Greenhouse is the Principal Assistant Responsible for Contracting (``PARC'' in the alphabet soup of military acronyms) in the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Lest the title fool, she is responsible for awarding BILLIONS UPON BILLIONS OF TAXPAYERS' MONEY to private companies hired to resurrect war-torn Iraq and to feed, clothe, shelter and do the laundry of American troops stationed there.

Greenhouse has known for a long time that her days may be numbered. Her needling of contracts awarded to Halliburton subsidiary Kellogg, Brown & Root (KBR) predated the war in Iraq, beginning with costs she said were SPIRALING "OUT OF CONTROL" from a 2000 Bosnia contract to service U.S. troops.
From 1995 to 2000, Halliburton's CEO was Dick Cheney, who left to run for vice president. He maintains his former company HAS NOT received preferential treatment from the government.
(Cheney still receives up to $1 MILLION A YEAR from Halliburton as part of his severance package.)

Halliburton is also under federal investigation for alleged favoritism by the Bush administration. FBI agents questioned Greenhouse for nine hours last November about that probe. In March, a former employee was indicted for taking bribes while working for KBR in Iraq.

In her job, Greenhouse is mandated by Congress to get the best quality at the cheapest price from the most qualified supplier. Over her objections, KBR was awarded three multibillion-dollar war-related contracts, two of them WITHOUT competitive bidding.

Together, they are worth as much as $20 billion - the entire cost of the Manhattan Project, adjusted to today's dollars.

Greenhouse's most strenuous complaints were over the Restore Iraqi Oil contract, estimated at $7 billion, originally planned to handle oil field fires that might be started by Saddam Hussein's troops. When that failed to happen, it morphed into an agreement to repair oil fields and import fuel for civilians and soldiers.

The contract was given to KBR in March 2003. In Greenhouse's view, that process VIOLATED federal regulations concerning fair and open bidding.

Later, she would tell Democratic members of Congress:
``The abuse related to contracts awarded to KBR represents the most blatant and improper contract abuse I have ever witnessed during the course of my professional career.''

She was joined by a former Halliburton employee who said KBR fed spoiled food to American troops and charged the government for thousands of meals it never served.
__________________________________________

WHY IS SHE "HISTORY" FOR DOING HER JOB ????????????

CAUSE SHE GET TOO CLOSE TO THE "BLATENT" RIPOFF TO THE TAXPAYERS ?????

DID SHE "LIE" ???????????????

[buffknut]

You all do know of course that Cindy Sheehan did in fact already meet the President and that it has been widely reported (except of course by the MSM most of you read, although even in their news reports they have mentioned it). And she did state how she felt the President was very caring, etc. This is all widely reported and you can go look it up. She has obviously changed her tune now that she is a tool of the far-left wackos who are obviously using her.

And you also know that not only did her son volunteer, but that he Re-enlisted. And that he wasn't even in a combat unit but voluntarily went out on the mission where he was killed.

But again, maybe you don't know that and all the BS posted here by many of you (especially avet's typical lengthy posts) is because you just don't know any facts.

So again, I'll point you to:
www.littlegreenfootballs.com
www.polipundit.com
www.powerlineblog.com
www.instapundit.com

All excellent sources of actual news. And, I don't even need to post anymore because I'll just take my talking points from those sites anyway (I'm so "empty" y'know).

[Boost Buffalo]

Nice work, Buffknut. I didnt know Bush already met with the crazed, bereft woman, or the story behind her extremely honorable, patriotic son.

Amazing...

[biker]

No kidding. I thought everyone knew.

Then maybe you didn't know that she initially spoke glowingly of the meeting.

[avet]

Amazing that more and more of the majority don't belive in your BS anymore. The neverending two-faced lies just ain't cutting it anymore.

Bush's support for the troops, that I have listed previously, is ...."FACT".

PROVE IT WRONG! or GO BACK TO YOUR BS NAMECALLING!


Newsweek and Associated Press polls taken in early August measured his job approval rating at 42 percent, the lowest level ever. Approval of his handling of Iraq was even lower -- 34 percent in Newsweek's sampling, 38 percent in the AP's.

[WestCoastPerspective]

As the Brits said after Bush was re-elected....how can so many Americans be so dumb?!?! :eek:

[WestSideJohn]

Say, here's a question for the "Hooray for War!" crowd.

When discussing any sort of dissent a common complaint is that anti-war protesters are responsible for increasing the danger to our troops. Yet when discussing 9/11 and the idea that our past actions may have led to the attacks, we're told that the responsibility is 100% on the people who carried out the acts, not on anything Americans might have done.

I'd like our "Hooray for War!" posters to pick one: either the actions of the United States and its citizens have repercussions abroad or they don't. Heck, I'll even let you choose which one it is. But it simply can't be both.

[Boost Buffalo]

Originally posted by WestSideJohn

... anti-war protesters are responsible for increasing the danger to our troops.

911... the responsibility is 100% on the people who carried out the acts....

But it simply can't be both.


Not meaning to be difficult, I dont see the connection there.

It is both.

[biker]

Originally posted by WestCoastPerspective
As the Brits said after Bush was re-elected....how can so many Americans be so dumb?!?! :eek:

Never have so many been so smug about so little.

(And I ain't talking about the Brits!)

[therising]

Originally posted by Boost Buffalo
thats clever, Westcoastlib, how did you ever think up that question. surprised it hasnt been addressed a dozen times already...thats an original for sure:rolleyes:

About once a month or so I get a true "Laugh out Loud" reading these posts.

Thank You Boost for giving me this month's laugh.

BoostBuffalo, Mr. one-response-for-every=topic, questioning someone else's originality!

Brilliant!!!

[WestCoastPerspective]

http://img384.imageshack.us/img384/4217/bushdailymirrordumbpeople4si.jpg

http://img384.imageshack.us/img384/7407/bushairforceone9gl.jpg

[citymouse]

Bush screwed up. If he did the right thing or did it the right way Iraq would be a free fully functional democracy right now and our boys and girls would be home and not still over there still dying on a daily basis.
He won the his war, but we lost the peace.
The woman just wants to ask him face to face what the noble cause her son died for.
Our children, including her late son hade the courage to go over theree on his whim and give their all and he dosen't even have the courage to face a middle aged woman and answer her question face to face.
Some commander in chief, some example for the people he is supposed to lead.

[biker]

Originally posted by citymouse
Bush screwed up. If he did the right thing or did it the right way Iraq would be a free fully functional democracy right now and our boys and girls would be home and not still over there still dying on a daily basis.
He won the his war, but we lost the peace.
The woman just wants to ask him face to face what the noble cause her son died for.
Our children, including her late son hade the courage to go over theree on his whim and give their all and he dosen't even have the courage to face a middle aged woman and answer her question face to face.
Some commander in chief, some example for the people he is supposed to lead.

He did meet her, which she appreciated. At first. But this is a better schtick.

So what would have been your grand plan to do it the right way, so "Iraq would be a free fully functional democracy."

Go ahead; you even have the benefit of hindsight.

As the real reason Clinton won said, "I'm all ears."

[jbinbny]

Originally posted by WestCoastPerspective
http://img384.imageshack.us/img384/4217/bushdailymirrordumbpeople4si.jpg

http://img384.imageshack.us/img384/7407/bushairforceone9gl.jpg


Boy, the Daily Mirror....that's where I go to get my unbiased news coverage.


What a joke!

[atotaltotalfan2001]

Originally posted by biker
He did meet her, which she appreciated. At first. But this is a better schtick.



Biker, I read that the story about Sheehan appreciating Bush's remarks in their encounter was taken out of context by the Drudge Report and then happily expounded upon by that weird Reilly guy on FOX before it could be confirmed.

As with so many things, I don't really know which account is accurate. But dumping on a mom who lost her son to the war, or whatever it is, in Iraq reeks (IMO!) of the Swift Boat-style tactics of character assassination we saw in the last election.

I say leave the woman alone. She's gone now, maybe for good. Her 15 minutes of fame are, it seems, over. She may try to extend her run to avoid dealing with her son's death, but sooner or later she'll have no choice but to confront her new reality.

No point in trashing her. It's just bad PR for Republicans, and -- I really hate to say this -- Bush has probably handled it better than his character-assassination supporters.

One caveat (sp?):

Enough with the vacations! Bush is a war president; he should act like one.

People criticize those who oppose the Iraq situation as hurting the morale of our soldiers over there.

I hope our soldiers over there aren't watching the video of Bush gaily riding his bike during his vacation.

Now, that would be demoralizing! (IMO, as always)

[buffknut]

Westside,

I also don't understand your post. It is both. Obviously you are one of those who feels America needs to apologize to the world. I don't feel that way.

Totalfan, I agree with you that she had her 15 minutes and needs to just go away. You don't seriously think the President actually is on a vacation like you or I would take, do you? In this day & age there's no reason he can't perform his duties anywhere he wants. And are you jealous of his bike riding skills? He is supposed to be quite the trail rider and is quite fit, which I think sets an awful good example for the rest of us (although I'm in pretty darn good shape myself, if I may brag just a bit).

Westcoast, please count me among the 59Million plus dummies. Sorry if I'm not as smart as you are.

citymouse, please read my previous post. She already has met the President. So your slam on the President is unwarranted.

[citymouse]

Originally posted by biker
So what would have been your grand plan to do it the right way, so "Iraq would be a free fully functional democracy."

Go ahead; you even have the benefit of hindsight.


I would rather use the term foresight.
I wouldn't have gone in without a plan to get out.
As indicated by the lack of WMD's, Iraq may have been a problem in the long term, but there was no reason to damn the torpedoes and full speed ahead all hell bent for leather and go in there like we did.
Maybe they should have thought out the scenarios a little better, they had plenty of time.
They didn't and here we are.

[atotaltotalfan2001]

Originally posted by buffknut
Westside,

I also don't understand your post. It is both. Obviously you are one of those who feels America needs to apologize to the world. I don't feel that way.

Totalfan, I agree with you that she had her 15 minutes and needs to just go away. You don't seriously think the President actually is on a vacation like you or I would take, do you? In this day & age there's no reason he can't perform his duties anywhere he wants. And are you jealous of his bike riding skills? He is supposed to be quite the trail rider and is quite fit, which I think sets an awful good example for the rest of us (although I'm in pretty darn good shape myself, if I may brag just a bit).

Westcoast, please count me among the 59Million plus dummies. Sorry if I'm not as smart as you are.

citymouse, please read my previous post. She already has met the President. So your slam on the President is unwarranted.


Hi Buffknut. Haven't talked to you in a while.

I'm sure Bush is doing some work while he vacations. But he leaves a very cavalier impression when he is riding his bike in the lovely morning sun while, a world away, soldiers don't know if they'll last the day.

It bespeaks a certain arrogance, IMO.

A half-consious PR guy would have told Bush what a bad impression those bike riding sessions would make on all but the most hard-cord Bush supporters.

But it seems that didn't matter. After all , Bush does not think he's ever made a mistake. So what would it matter to him that he is happily gliding along on his bike -- reveling in the feel of air, the beauty of the landscape -- while kids die a world a way?

It is, I suspect, easy to say those deaths are for the greater good.

Then again, if he feels that way, why aren't his own daughters enlisting?

Indeed, why didn't he enlist for combat duty when he had the chance?

[WestSideJohn]

Originally posted by buffknut
Westside, Obviously you are one of those who feels America needs to apologize to the world.You're a liar.

[biker]

[i]

Enough with the vacations! Bush is a war president; he should act like one.

) [/B]

What a soft lob.

Is this the best the new playbook for you libs can do.

Since you whiffed big time with "Why aren't the sons of any Senators or House members serving?" Non-starter there.

Care to compare Roosevelt's numerous vacances and persoanl timeouts with those of Bush.

Why don't you just give up with feeble attempts at reasoned statements and say what's at the bottom of all the left's failed jibes:

"IhateBushIhateBushIhateBushIhateBushIhateBush."


"And I hated Reagan too."

[avet]

I hate Bush's lies, I hate Bush's lies, I hate Bush's lies, I hate Bush's lies, I hate Bush's lies, I hate Bush's lies, I hate Bush's lies, I hate Bush's lies, I hate Bush's lies, I hate Bush's lies, I hate Bush's lies, I hate Bush's lies, I hate Bush's lies, I hate Bush's lies, I hate Bush's lies, I hate Bush's lies,....

You wanna bring up the past?

Why was the Bush family financially connected to the Bin Laden's ?

Why was the Bush family protecting the Bin Laden's after we were attacked ?

Why hasn't Bush caught the world's most evil villian like he "swore" he would ?
_________________________________________

Your "feeble attempts" to perpetuate this "war"(?), based on nothing but lies, whiffs of "terrorism" , by the Patriot Act.

You are causing the unnecessary further loss of good American lives.

[atotaltotalfan2001]

Originally posted by biker
What a soft lob.

Is this the best the new playbook for you libs can do.

Since you whiffed big time with "Why aren't the sons of any Senators or House members serving?" Non-starter there.

Care to compare Roosevelt's numerous vacances and persoanl timeouts with those of Bush.

Why don't you just give up with feeble attempts at reasoned statements and say what's at the bottom of all the left's failed jibes:

"IhateBushIhateBushIhateBushIhateBushIhateBush."


"And I hated Reagan too."
1. Gimme proof Biker of FDR's numerous vacations during WWII.

2. Stop assuming I'm a lib. You should know better than that, but your reasoning abilities seem to shut down when Iraq and Bush are a subject. Not okay.

3. I have a question you've never answered. Why don't all you hawks entlist?

You've call that a tired old question. Whatever. That is not the same as actually giving an answer to the question, is it?

You, and your fellow hawks, always dodge that question. I wonder why?

[captjacksparrow]

Originally posted by crlachepinochet
I'd run out of fingers and toes before I could count the number of days in even a semester where there were recruiters in my the cafeteria of my HS. They set up a table with pamphlets and whatnot, and if "business" was slow, they would walk around and talk to people. There's also the ASVAB test, which is as sure of a way as there is to get military recruiters hounding you at home!

Not allowed in our schools. No one can get up and walk around and talk to anyone. It's not as easy as you say but perhaps this was done years before the heightened security policies were
put into place in HS's.

There is no hounding at home, even with 3 boys of "age"...

[yokes]

Because enlisting is voluntary and I didnt think it was for me.

No-one is forced to enlist anymore.

Volunteer meens you cant complain when someones kids dont enlist because even the president of the US cant force his kids to enlist

[WestCoastPerspective]

For Scoots, Boosts and the other slimers:

The Swift Boating of Cindy Sheehan
By FRANK RICH

CINDY SHEEHAN couldn't have picked a more apt date to begin the vigil that ambushed a president: Aug. 6 was the fourth anniversary of that fateful 2001 Crawford vacation day when George W. Bush responded to an intelligence briefing titled "Bin Laden Determined to Attack Inside the United States" by going fishing. On this Aug. 6 the president was no less determined to shrug off bad news. Though 14 marine reservists had been killed days earlier by a roadside bomb in Haditha, his national radio address that morning made no mention of Iraq. Once again Mr. Bush was in his bubble, ensuring that he wouldn't see Ms. Sheehan coming. So it goes with a president who hasn't foreseen any of the setbacks in the war he fabricated against an enemy who did not attack inside the United States in 2001.

When these setbacks happen in Iraq itself, the administration punts. But when they happen at home, there's a game plan. Once Ms. Sheehan could no longer be ignored, the Swift Boating began. Character assassination is the Karl Rove tactic of choice, eagerly mimicked by his media surrogates, whenever the White House is confronted by a critic who challenges it on matters of war. The Swift Boating is especially vicious if the critic has more battle scars than a president who connived to serve stateside and a vice president who had "other priorities" during Vietnam.

True to form, the attack on Cindy Sheehan surfaced early on Fox News, where she was immediately labeled a "crackpot" by Fred Barnes. The right-wing blogosphere quickly spread tales of her divorce, her angry Republican in-laws, her supposed political flip-flops, her incendiary sloganeering and her association with known ticket-stub-carrying attendees of "Fahrenheit 9/11." Rush Limbaugh went so far as to declare that Ms. Sheehan's "story is nothing more than forged documents - there's nothing about it that's real."

But this time the Swift Boating failed, utterly, and that failure is yet another revealing historical marker in this summer's collapse of political support for the Iraq war.

When the Bush mob attacks critics like Ms. Sheehan, its highest priority is to change the subject. If we talk about Richard Clarke's character, then we stop talking about the administration's pre-9/11 inattentiveness to terrorism. If Thomas Wilson is trashed as an insubordinate plant of the "liberal media," we forget the Pentagon's abysmal failure to give our troops adequate armor (a failure that persists today, eight months after he spoke up). If we focus on Joseph Wilson's wife, we lose the big picture of how the administration twisted intelligence to gin up the threat of Saddam's nonexistent W.M.D.'s.

The hope this time was that we'd change the subject to Cindy Sheehan's "wacko" rhetoric and the opportunistic left-wing groups that have attached themselves to her like barnacles. That way we would forget about her dead son. But if much of the 24/7 media has taken the bait, much of the public has not.

The backdrops against which Ms. Sheehan stands - both that of Mr. Bush's what-me-worry vacation and that of Iraq itself - are perfectly synergistic with her message of unequal sacrifice and fruitless carnage. Her point would endure even if the messenger were shot by a gun-waving Crawford hothead or she never returned to Texas from her ailing mother's bedside or the president folded the media circus by actually meeting with her.

The public knows that what matters this time is Casey Sheehan's story, not the mother who symbolizes it. Cindy Sheehan's bashers, you'll notice, almost never tell her son's story. They are afraid to go there because this young man's life and death encapsulate not just the noble intentions of those who went to fight this war but also the hubris, incompetence and recklessness of those who gave the marching orders.

Specialist Sheehan was both literally and figuratively an Eagle Scout: a church group leader and honor student whose desire to serve his country drove him to enlist before 9/11, in 2000. He died with six other soldiers on a rescue mission in Sadr City on April 4, 2004, at the age of 24, the week after four American security workers had been mutilated in Falluja and two weeks after he arrived in Iraq. This was almost a year after the president had declared the end of "major combat operations" from the aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln.

According to the account of the battle by John F. Burns in The Times, the insurgents who slaughtered Specialist Sheehan and his cohort were militiamen loyal to Moktada al-Sadr, the anti-American Shiite cleric. The Americans probably didn't stand a chance. As Mr. Burns reported, members of "the new Iraqi-trained police and civil defense force" abandoned their posts at checkpoints and police stations "almost as soon as the militiamen appeared with their weapons, leaving the militiamen in unchallenged control."

Casey Sheehan's death in Iraq could not be more representative of the war's mismanagement and failure, but it is hardly singular. Another mother who has journeyed to Crawford, Celeste Zappala, wrote last Sunday in New York's Daily News of how her son, Sgt. Sherwood Baker, was also killed in April 2004 - in Baghdad, where he was providing security for the Iraq Survey Group, which was charged with looking for W.M.D.'s "well beyond the admission by David Kay that they didn't exist."

As Ms. Zappala noted with rage, her son's death came only a few weeks after Mr. Bush regaled the Radio and Television Correspondents' Association banquet in Washington with a scripted comedy routine featuring photos of him pretending to look for W.M.D.'s in the Oval Office. "We'd like to know if he still finds humor in the fabrications that justified the war that killed my son," Ms. Zappala wrote. (Perhaps so: surely it was a joke that one of the emissaries Mr. Bush sent to Cindy Sheehan in Crawford was Stephen Hadley, the national security adviser who took responsibility for allowing the 16 errant words about doomsday uranium into the president's prewar State of the Union speech.)

Mr. Bush's stand-up shtick for the Beltway press corps wasn't some aberration; it was part of the White House's political plan for keeping the home front cool. America was to yuk it up, party on and spend its tax cuts heedlessly while the sacrifice of an inadequately manned all-volunteer army in Iraq was kept out of most Americans' sight and minds. This is why the Pentagon issued a directive at the start of Operation Iraqi Freedom forbidding news coverage of "deceased military personnel returning to or departing from" air bases. It's why Mr. Bush, unlike Ronald Reagan and Jimmy Carter, has not attended funeral services for the military dead. It's why January's presidential inauguration, though nominally dedicated to the troops, was a gilded $40 million jamboree at which the word Iraq was banished from the Inaugural Address.

THIS summer in Crawford, the White House went to this playbook once too often. When Mr. Bush's motorcade left a grieving mother in the dust to speed on to a fund-raiser, that was one fat-cat party too far. The strategy of fighting a war without shared national sacrifice has at last backfired, just as the strategy of Swift Boating the war's critics has reached its Waterloo before Patrick Fitzgerald's grand jury in Washington. The 24/7 cable and Web attack dogs can keep on sliming Cindy Sheehan. The president can keep trying to ration the photos of flag-draped caskets. But this White House no longer has any more control over the insurgency at home than it does over the one in Iraq.


So it goes with a president who hasn't foreseen any of the setbacks in the war he fabricated against an enemy who did not attack inside the United States in 2001.

[300miles]

This protest has turned into a circus freak show. They claim they just want to meet the president, as if the President of the USA can or should meet with every citizen that happens to want to talk with him. And they mistakenly feel that an angry mob scene chanting anti-bush slogans will improve their chances of meeting him.

Now here comes the backlash... other parents of fallen soldiers that support bush now feel they have to come stand up for the president and so the circus tent grows larger, and the News media has a field day.

The only thing that will end this (hopefully) is when Bush goes back to washington. It was a truly sorrowful situation but they only created a pointless protest to grab the usual tv sound bites.

wait! maybe Springstein and Green Day can rush down there too and get some footage for their music videos! And Susan Surandan can give a few speeches too! Sweet. They better hurry before the big show is over.
:rolleyes:

[atotaltotalfan2001]

Originally posted by 300miles
This protest has turned into a circus freak show. They claim they just want to meet the president, as if the President of the USA can or should meet with every citizen that happens to want to talk with him. And they mistakenly feel that an angry mob scene chanting anti-bush slogans will improve their chances of meeting him.

Now here comes the backlash... other parents of fallen soldiers that support bush now feel they have to come stand up for the president and so the circus tent grows larger, and the News media has a field day.

The only thing that will end this (hopefully) is when Bush goes back to washington. It was a truly sorrowful situation but they only created a pointless protest to grab the usual tv sound bites.



Why was it pointless? Aren't people allowed to protest wars anymore?

[therising]

Why was it pointless? Aren't people allowed to protest wars anymore?

Those who see peace protests as Amercia-bashing have really failed to grasp the concept of what this Country is all about.

As much as they claim to love America, they'd just as soon see Cindy Sheehan in this situation. (http://www.hotpolitics.com/tank-1.jpg)

[biker]

Not all.

You people are just too simplistic.

[300miles]

I meant pointless because their form of protest does not lead to any solution or even dialog. All it does is antagonize because there is no focus to it.

They claim they want to meet the president, but purposely setup a confrontational situation that any president would clearly avoid.

They should have a clear purpose to their protest. What is it? It seems to change daily.... To meet the president and talk? (How many average citizens get to talk with the president... and this woman ALREADY HAS.) To pull all troops out now and allow Iraq to fall into Anarchy? What they say that want isn't what they're accomplishing through what is basically an unfocused bitch-fest.

No.. their only 'point' is to protest for the sake of protest. To get themselves on TV. All this does is create an ugly situation. It doesn't lead to any solutions. This event has morphed into something that no longer about Sheehan. it's about "Us vs. Them" which is totally unproductive.

I would support her 100% if she setup a sincere protest with the purpose of meeting the president without the anti-bush shrill.

Also mind you that I said I thought it was Pointless. I did NOT say anywhere that she should not have the right to make pointless protests. She has the right to do whatever she wants. Don't put words in my mouth.

[avet]

All it does is antagonize because there is no focus to it.
Where was the "focus"........ to "start" another war, where we shouldn't have?

He has WMD'S & will "attack us, ...he has WMD'S & will "attack us, ...he has WMD'S & will "attack us, ...he has WMD'S & will "attack us, ...he has WMD'S & will "attack us, ...he has WMD'S & will "attack us, ......on EVERY news report, 24\7.
__________________________________________

"What I want to ask those who have become so fluent in "weapons of mass destruction" speak...and "he gassed his own people" speak...where were you 6 months ago, or a year ago?
Where was your concern for the Kurds back then?
If I'm not mistaken, back then, the Kurds were just another bunch of radical Islamics we were supposed to be at war with.

And why weren't you afraid of Iraq and their weapons of mass destruction back then?

Probably because the powers that be were telling you to be afraid of Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda, and later of course, just al-Qaeda, as Osama bin Laden became Osama been FORGOTTEN when we couldn't find him...which is no big deal heck...half the time we can't even find Dick Cheney...but when the war effort stalls, and the administration decides to switch boogie men in mid trail, the partisans follow along blindly, and start chanting "weapons of mass destruction" and "he gassed his own people" in unison ad nauseum.

This is not Gulf War 1, where the main objective was to chase Saddam out of Kuwait. This is Gulf War the Sequel, where the main objective, regime change, involves a whole lot more than chasing. It involves running the economy, keeping domestic peace, and protecting the borders. What model are we going to use, Afghanistan? Nope, haven't done it there...Hell, we haven't even done it HERE AT HOME!! But we HAVE to get rid of Saddam.."weapons of mass destruction...gassed his own people...ohmmmmm".

events collectively...were a 'sign' if you will, that said...
"You're going after the WRONG guys."

How many of the 9-11 homicide hijackers came from Iraq????
How much money has Saddam Hussein spent subsidizing the spread of radical Wahhabi Islam around the world?????
Al-Qaeda and any other radical Islamists are your enemy !!!!!

Focus!! .....don't "chant."


....there is no focus to it
_______________________________________________

WHERE'S THE "FOCUS" ??????
If George Bush has done so much to "protect us" here at home, why is the Mexican border swung open like a huge barn yard door in the wind ????
_______________________________________________

"Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised."
George W. Bush
Address to the Nation
March 17, 2003

(IT'S JUST "THE REST OF THE ENTIRE WORLD" THAT TOTALLY DOUBTS IT.)
_______________________________________________

"I have no doubt we're going to find big stores of weapons of mass destruction."
Defense Policy Board member Kenneth Adelman
Washington Post, p. A27
March 23, 2003
________________________________________________

"We know where they are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat."
Donald Rumsfeld
ABC Interview
March 30, 2003
________________________________________________

"We'll find them. It'll be a matter of time to do so."
George W. Bush
Remarks to Reporters
May 3, 2003
________________________________________________

"I'm absolutely sure that there are weapons of mass destruction there and the evidence will be forthcoming. We're just getting it just now. "
Colin Powell
Remarks to Reporters
May 4, 2003
________________________________________________

"They may have had time to destroy them, and I don't know the answer."
Donald Rumsfeld
Remarks to the Council on Foreign Relations
May 27, 2003
_________________________________________________

"For bureaucratic reasons, we settled on one issue, weapons of mass destruction (as justification for invading Iraq) because it was the ONE reason everyone could agree on."
Paul Wolfowitz
Vanity Fair interview
May 28, 2003
_________________________________________________

"It was a surprise to me then — it remains a surprise to me now — that we have not uncovered weapons, as you say, in some of the forward dispersal sites. Believe me, it's not for lack of trying.

We've been to virtually every ammunition supply point between the Kuwaiti border and Baghdad, but they're simply .....not there."
Lt. Gen. James Conway, 1st Marine Expeditionary Force
Press Interview
May 30, 2003
_________________________________________________

WHERE'S THE "FOCUS" IN STARTING & RUNNING A WAR WHERE WE SHOULDN'T... "EVEN BE" ???

[WestSideJohn]

it's about "Us vs. Them" which is totally unproductive.I'm thrilled to finally hear someone else say this.

The "Us vs. Them" mentality practiced by Ann "Liberals are Traitors" Coulter or right here on this board by Boost "Liberals are anti-American" Buffalo is one of the... what's that? You were referring to a mother who lost her son in Iraq as the one turning it into an "Us vs. Them" discussion? Yowza.

[atotaltotalfan2001]

Originally posted by 300miles
I meant pointless because their form of protest does not lead to any solution or even dialog. All it does is antagonize because there is no focus to it.

They claim they want to meet the president, but purposely setup a confrontational situation that any president would clearly avoid.

They should have a clear purpose to their protest. What is it? It seems to change daily.... To meet the president and talk? (How many average citizens get to talk with the president... and this woman ALREADY HAS.) To pull all troops out now and allow Iraq to fall into Anarchy? What they say that want isn't what they're accomplishing through what is basically an unfocused bitch-fest.

No.. their only 'point' is to protest for the sake of protest. To get themselves on TV. All this does is create an ugly situation. It doesn't lead to any solutions. This event has morphed into something that no longer about Sheehan. it's about "Us vs. Them" which is totally unproductive.

I would support her 100% if she setup a sincere protest with the purpose of meeting the president without the anti-bush shrill.

Also mind you that I said I thought it was Pointless. I did NOT say anywhere that she should not have the right to make pointless protests. She has the right to do whatever she wants. Don't put words in my mouth.

Cindy Sheehan wanted to get the president's attention, and I can't imagine any other way she could have done it more effectively.

It doesn't matter whether we agree or disagree with her. She has the right to protest.

Now the other side is showing up at Crawford to have their say. So be it.

[300miles]

Originally posted by atotaltotalfan2001
It doesn't matter whether we agree or disagree with her. She has the right to protest.

Now the other side is showing up at Crawford to have their say. So be it.

you can keep saying that, but I never said other wise. It's interesting how you keep repeating she has a right to protest, yet according to you I don't have the right to think she's misguided. Do you think it's ok for a protester to call the president an idiot, but not for me to call the protester the same??

I suppose the only people that have the right of free speech are those opposing the president?

:rolleyes:

And WestSideJohn - I seriously believe all "us vs. them" mentality is misguided. not just protesters like sheehan. I don't agree with the extreme Right and their "our president, right or wrong" mentality either. I am in full agreement the president has made mistakes. Possibly I just don't agree those mistakes are as far reaching as you because I agree with some aspects of his decisions

What I get frustrated with are people that complain, but offer no solutions. "Out of Iraq Now!" is no longer a solution, but will cause MORE problems. Plunging the Middle east into anarchy by pulling out tomorrow is not a valid choice at this point, and I think most would agree, whether you support the war or not.

We need constructive debate on HOW to get out.

[WestSideJohn]

Originally posted by 300miles
We need constructive debate on HOW to get out. I agree with that 100 percent.

But... (come on, you knew there was going to be a but)

I don't trust the folks who were stupid enough to be fooled by the smoking gun / iminent threat / WMD claims to be a part of this debate. If they had taken 20 seconds to examine the evidence for themselves, they'd have seen that the facts simply did not add up. They didn't bother. Maybe they were too lazy. Maybe they were too stupid. I don't care why. They've failed us and I don't see why I should listen to them now.

Same with the administration. Let's say the Republican line is true and that Mr. Bush and his administration were simply the helpless victims of bad intelligence from the CIA. Why should we trust these idiots to come up with a sensible plan for rebuilding Iraq and getting out?

I'll be the first to admit that I've yet to hear any Democrats offering a workable solution. Then again, I've yet to hear Republicans even admit there's a problem. Or that they created it. It's so much easier to focus on Cindy Sheehan's shortcomings, isn't it?

[atotaltotalfan2001]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by 300miles
[B]

Their only 'point' is to protest for the sake of protest. To get themselves on TV. All this does is create an ugly situation. It doesn't lead to any solutions. This event has morphed into something that no longer about Sheehan. it's about "Us vs. Them" which is totally unproductive."


So, are you saying only protests that someone somewhere defines as having a point are okay?

The point of her protest seems perfectly clear to me -- to get the president's, and the country's, attention on the mounting death toll in Iraq.

I don't know whether her protest will end up having been productive or not.

I guess it depends on what you regard as productive. Were the Vietman war protests unproductive?

Moving on. To quote you once again:


"It's interesting how you keep repeating she has a right to protest, yet according to you I don't have the right to think she's misguided. Do you think it's ok for a protester to call the president an idiot, but not for me to call the protester the same?? "

I suppose the only people that have the right of free speech are those opposing the president?

:rolleyes: "



I never said you don't have a right to your opinion, or to express it.

And I surely did not say only Bush's opponents have right to speak out. As I noted, the anti-Sheehan camp is in full swing now with its protest. "So be it," as I already said.

Stop putting words in my mouth.

[300miles]

Originally posted by WestSideJohn
I've yet to hear any Democrats offering a workable solution. Then again, I've yet to hear Republicans even admit there's a problem. Or that they created it.
yes. and that is why there is no real constructive debate. Each side is talking with WMD's in their ears.


Originally posted by WestSideJohn It's so much easier to focus on Cindy Sheehan's shortcomings, isn't it?
Ah, but Sheehan was the topic of this thread.


Originally posted by atotaltotalfan2001Stop putting words in my mouth.
just giving back some of your medicine
:)