Powered by
Movable Type 3.2
Design by
Danny Carlton





Made with NoteTab

August 15, 2005

Does Cindy Sheehan care?

From the Associated Press...

Thirty bodies were found Sunday in a grave south of Baghdad, Iraqi forces said.

Iraqi commandos were led to the grave in the Owerij industrial district in southern Baghdad after interrogating insurgents detained in a raid earlier in the day, Col. Selam al-Maamuri of the Interior Ministry said.

The grave, which al-Maamuri estimated was 10 to 14 days old, included the bodies of two women. Al-Maamuri did not identify the dead or say how they were killed.

From NewsMax...

U.S. troops raided a suspected insurgent chemical weapons factory in northern Iraq, finding about 1,500 gallons of dangerous substances, the U.S. military said Saturday.

Lt. Col. Steve Boylan, a military spokesman, said 11 chemicals were found in the hideout in Mosul, 225 miles northwest of Baghdad, "which are dangerous by themselves, and mixed together they would become even more dangerous."

Meanwhile in Crawford, Texas, WorldNetDaily reports...

As she continues her anti-war protest, Cindy Sheehan is labeling President Bush a "maniac" and a "lying bastard," and she's vowing not to pay her federal income tax....

"Quit saying that U.S. troops died for a noble cause in Iraq, unless you say, 'well, except for Casey Sheehan.' Don't you dare spill any more blood in Casey's name. You do not have permission to use my son's name.

"And the other thing I want him to tell me is 'just what was the noble cause Casey died for?' Was it freedom and democracy? Bullsh--! He died for oil. He died to make your friends richer. He died to expand American imperialism in the Middle East. We're not freer here, thanks to your Patriot Act. Iraq is not free. You get America out of Iraq and Israel out of Palestine and you'll stop the terrorism," she said.

Drudge quotes Sheehan as saying...

“You get America out of Iraq and Israel out of Palestine and you'll stop the terrorism,”

Hey, Cindy, define “Palestine”.

Of course rabid anti-Semitism hasn't made leftists shy away from joining anyone opposed to Bush/national defense/America before, so I doubt it will now. It seems the one belittling her son's death the most is Cindy Sheehan herself.

Coverage: Michelle Malkin (also here), Captain's Quarters, T. Longren, Right Wing News, WizBang (also here), Jawa Report, Iraq the Model, Blogs for Bush, HyScience, RW Conspiracy, Ace of Spades

Posted by Danny Carlton at August 15, 2005 11:43 AM

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.jacklewis.net/cgi-bin/mt/jl-tb.cgi/1852

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Does Cindy Sheehan care?:

» Top 9 New Cindy Sheehan Demands from Political Satire Fake News - The Nose On Your Face
Even as Cindy Sheehan continues her vigil outside of President Bush's Crawford ranch, she has released a list of new demands that she expects to have met by weeks end. The list includes a call for President Bush's impeachment and [Read More]

Tracked on August 15, 2005 02:18 PM

Comments

You can't answer Cindy's question Either Can you?

WHAT "NOBLE CAUSE" was Casey Sheehan ORDERED to die for?


Posted by: owlbear1 at August 15, 2005 10:25 PM

"But why should we hear about body bags, and deaths, and how many, what day it's gonna happen, and how many this or what do you suppose? Or, I mean, it's, it's not relevant. So why should I waste my beautiful mind on something like that? And watch him suffer."

- Barbara Bush on "Good Morning America," March 18, 2003

Posted by: Steve J. at August 15, 2005 11:35 PM

Owlbear1, I did answer her question in the first two news quotes.

Steve, When the MSM focus exclusively on who, how many and how they died to the exclusion of why they're there, and the soldier's view of the nobility of their risk, that's not news, it's propaganda.

Posted by: Danny Carlton at August 16, 2005 04:04 AM

I notice that ‘The Huffington Post’ has adopted Cindy Sheehan’s rantings and are carrying all her messages and letters. I remember Huffington, and wasn’t she the person who ran anti-SUV ads that suggested that people who bought sports utility vehicles were supporting terrorist? Isn’t that the same Arianna Huffington who drives around in limo’s and has private jets at her disposal? I wonder exactly what would be the ratio of gas consumption between a SUV and a private jet or a limo as far as that goes. Getting back to the subject of Cindy Sheehan, I just read an article she wrote for ‘The Huffington Post’ in which she defends some of her comments about Israel, by blaming them on a former friend. Here is a quote from that article, Cindy Sheehan– ” A former friend who is anti-Israel and wants to use the spotlight on me to push his anti-Semitism is telling everyone who is listening that I believe that Casey died for Israel and has gone so far as to apparently doctor an email from me.” I was watching the news and heard myself Cindy Sheehan say that her son didn’t join the military to protect Israel and it wasnt just my imagination. Maybe deposing Saddam did protect Israel to some degree, after all Saddam launched dozens of scud missiles at Israel as I recall. I believe also Saddam offered reward money for the families of suicide bombers who killed innocent Israeli women and children. So if in the process of removing Saddam,those actions were beneficial to Israel’s security, so be it, and Im glad that’s the case.

Posted by: William Leatherwood at August 21, 2005 03:40 AM

I see a great contrast between her first comments about her meeting with Bush in her interview on June 24, 2004, that was just several months after her son was killed, and the latest comments she is making about that same meeting with Bush. Cindy Sheehan first said after her meeting with Bush, that she " now knows that Bush is sincere about wanting freedom for the Iraqi's." Then she went on to say and I quote, " I know he's sorry and feels pain for our loss." She used two descriptions to describe her impressions of Bush after,Bush's meeting with her, "Sincere" and " He's sorry and feels pain for our loss." Now its quite the opposite description of Bush, if you were to listen to her new interpretation of that same meeting with Bush, you would think it was two seperate meetings. Cindy Sheehan now says about that meeting with Bush that " Every time we tried to talk about Casey and how much we missed him, he would change the subject,and he acted like it was a party." That statement indicates just the opposite of what she originally said about Bush, in that she even used the word "sincere" in describing Bush's demeanor. So I'm to take it that she felt that "acting like it was a party" was sincere, and sincere was as she described Bush in her first interview? The question that now remains concerning her two completely different versions of that meeting with Bush, is, which one is the true story and which one is the lie? In her first interview with David Henson she stated that Bush felt "sorry" about the loss of her son,then Cindy Sheehan turns around and says just the opposite in her interview with Blitzer and I quote " Yes, he came in very jovial, and like we should be happy that he, our son, died." Excuse me but "sorry" and "happy" are not synonyms Mrs.Sheehan. Cindy Sheehan's versions of that meeting with President Bush just don't match, they are not remotely similar.


Posted by: William Leatherwood at August 21, 2005 03:42 AM

No matter what invective the “sheehanites” desire to throw at me via “ad hominem”,it doesn’t really counter Cindy Sheehan’s contradictory statements, erroneous assertions and down right lies. They replied to some of my post by saying Im beating up on a defenseless grieving Mother. Im not beating up on Cindy Sheehan personally at all, she has every right to voice her opinion, but I also reserve the right to examine her statements and see if they are really consistent with the truth. The fact remains that in her first interview with David Henson she stated that Bush was “sincere” and “felt sorry for their loss.” Her husband or should I say “ex-husband” Patrick Sheehan followed up her praise of Bush by saying yes he agreed that Bush was sincere in their meeting. Later Cindy Sheehan made a complete 180 degree turn in the opposite direction and not only was Bush, in her second version of that same meeting, not sincere, but according to her he “acted like it was a party.” My reasonable question is which version is the truth and which is the distortion? During another interview on national television Cindy Sheehan stated that her son was killed by friendly fire, when she was pressed about that statement she then said ” well I have speculative evidence that he was killed by friendly fire.” It amazing that anyone could use the words speculative and evidence in the same sentence side by side and keep a straight face. Evidence substantiates an allegation, speculation is just the opposite it requires no evidence at all,to use “speculative evidence” together is a perfect example of an oxymoron. I also notice Cindy Sheehan refuses to elaborate on what reasons would led her to believe that her son Casey Sheehan was killed by friendly fire. The real truth of Casey Sheehan’s death is he was killed by hostile fire in Sadr City, this was the consistent report of his death since day one, medical reports and the reports from fellow soldiers confirm the same conclusion. There has never been one verifiable hint that Casey Sheehan was killed by friendly fire so you have to ask yourself whats Cindy Sheehans real objective in asserting a lie. Cindy Sheehan says she speaks for her son but Im seeing just the opposite, she is really only speaking for herself. Cindy Sheehan says her son Casey was against the war in Iraq, but Caseys actions prove just the opposite. If Casey Sheehan vehemently opposed the war in Iraq, like Cindy Sheehan contends, why would Casey reenlist in the first place to serve in a war he didnt believe in ? Casey Sheehan was a real hero of the first order, when a convoy of soldiers from his unit was attacked in Sadr City he volunteered to join a rescue force to get them out, even after his commanding Sergeant told him he didn’t have to go because he was mechanic and not an infantryman. Casey was reported telling his officer ” I go where my chief goes.” Thats not a man who didn’t believe in his cause or his duty, thats a hero. Cindy Sheehan is stating that her son was offered a “non-combat” position as a Chaplain’s assistant. Any soldier knows that Chaplain’s assistants are infantrymen assigned to protecting the Chaplain and Casey Sheehan was not a chaplain’s assistent in the first place. Cindy Sheehan also stated that she didn’t send the email to ABC’s Nightline that stated that “her son was not in Iraq to protect Israel.” First she said that a “former friend ” who just happened to be anti-Israel doctored the email . Here is what she said and I quote her. Cindy– “A former friend who is anti-Israel and wants to use the spotlight on me to push his anti-Semitism is telling everyone who is listening that I believe that Casey died for Israel and has gone so far as to apparently doctor an email from me.” This specter who is according to her, a “former friend” and just happens to be anti-Israel, is of course never named. I am under the impression that this person is none other than Cindy Sheehan herself. ABC now says it talked to Sheehan and she said she did in fact write the letter in question after all and she did receive an e-mail from ABC confirming that ABC had received it. But she thinks the version on the web has been tampered with.Now that it has been confirmed that she herself sent the email she totally changes her story once again.Now instead of asserting that ABC can’t confirm this mystery persons email and therefore its irresponsible to even report on this particular email, she now says she did send it, but she “thinks” it was tampered with. Im just curious how she could have written it and not really know if its been tampered with , she says now she thinks the web version was tampered with. I for one would like to hear testimonny from Casey Sheehans fellow soldiers in Iraq ,I bet they have a completly different version as to how Casey felt about the war then what is being presented by Cindy Sheehan. You know if Cindy Sheehan personally is against the war in Iraq, she has every right to voice her opinion, but to distort her sons mission and purpose and his own perspective on Iraq is just not right


Posted by: William Leatherwood at August 21, 2005 06:17 PM

I notice the “sheehanites” like owlbear1 love to repeat Cindy Sheehan’s redundant and what they consider to be “revelational” question , “What noble cause did Casey Sheehan die for?” Now I guess we have to return back to the elementary class of Saddam 101 to answer that question.

1. Saddam Hussein was a threat to peace in the Middle East. His aggression was only held in check by constant monitoring and economic sanctions that he then used as an excuse to starve and brutalize the people of his own country , all the while, building himself more and more elaborate and gaudy palaces. Was it “Noble” and should have Saddam been removed from power? Ask the Kurds, the Shiites, the Kuwaitis, the Saudis, the Iranians, and the marsh Arabs. I think they’d all say yes.

2. Saddam brutally tortured and killed hundreds of thousands maybe even millions of innocent people. In my opinion, that alone was sufficient for getting rid of him. “Nobly sufficient”

3. Saddam Hussein supported terrorism in the Middle East and around the world. It has been well-documented that Saddam Hussein paid $25,000 to families of Palestinian suicide bombers in Israel . Just eliminating that incentive to kill innocent Israeli woman and children is “noble” reason alone to remove Saddam. I know Cindy Sheehan is cringing about that one.

4. Terror groups associated with Al Qaeda were operating within Iraq in terrorist training camps such as Salman Pak before the war, and had been funded, at least in part, by the Iraqi government. There is no direct link, other then sheltering the terrorist, between Saddam Hussein and the attacks of September 11, 2001, but there is no doubt that Saddam was part of the larger problem of terrorism.

5. Saddam Hussein disregarded numerous United Nations resolutions, 17 in all, dealing with disarmament and inspections. His military fired anti-aircraft weapons at U.S. and U.K. aircraft patrolling the no-fly zones on a daily bases, so he never lived up even to the initial cease-fire agreement that ended hostilities at the end of the first Gulf War, let alone any of other numerous resolutions by the U.N. Security Council. Any one of those violations would provide legal justification for the war.

6. The “domino effect” theory for moving the Middle East towards democracy and away from terrorism has a good chance of working, and yes that alone is a NOBLE reason to be in Iraq. Witness Libya’s recent renouncement of terrorism and weapons of mass destruction. Iraq itself is moving inexorably toward democratic self-rule, despite the efforts of terrorists and “dead-enders” and the “anti-war defeatest at home” to sabotage the process. If our government stays the course, we will win in Iraq and that victory is for all Iraqi’s.

7. Removing Saddam Hussein, in my view, was a major part of the larger strategy for the Middle East to move the entire region away from Islamic fundamentalism, theocracy and brutal dictatorship, which give rise to terrorism, and towards representative governments, ruled by law and respectful of individual rights, which will bring peace and stability to the whole region. Yes that is a NOBLE reason and cause to be in Iraq. The insurgents want to keep the blood flowing long enough to distract from that goal, and also so in America dissent will rise against the war in Iraq resulting in a withdrawal.

And by the way owlbear1 you ask what noble cause was Casey Sheehan "ordered" to die for? So I guess you assume he was ordered into Sadr City on the day of his death correct? Casey Sheehan volunteered to go into Sadr City even after his Sergeant reminded him he didn't have to because he was a mechanic and not an infantryman. Casey was reported telling his officer, “I go where my chief goes.”

Posted by: William Leatherwood at August 23, 2005 02:34 PM

Post a comment




Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)

Security verification

Type the characters you see in the image above.