Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 45

Thread: The Cindy Sheehan you don't know

  1. #1
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,407
    Post Thanks / Like

    The Cindy Sheehan you don't know

    [B]The Cindy Sheehan you don't know
    By Cathy Young, Globe Columnist [/B]

    Sheehan's first and foremost demand is that all American troops be brought home from Iraq immediately. On this scale, irrationality becomes dangerous. Even many of those who opposed the war in Iraq from the start are convinced that a quick pullout would be a disaster -- both for the Iraqis, and for all those who would suffer if Iraq became a fully operational terrorist base. Who will have to give account to the bereaved men and women whose loved ones will be killed as a result?

    But there's more than that to Sheehan's politics. She is not simply against the war in Iraq (and, as she told talk show host Chris Matthews on CNBC, against the war in Afghanistan as well). She has thrown in her lot with the hardcore Michael Moore left, and this less savory aspect of her crusade has been largely ignored by the respectful media.

    In her public appearances, Sheehan has not only called Bush ''the biggest terrorist in the world" but suggested that his ''band of neocons" deliberately allowed the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11 to happen: ''9/11 was their Pearl Harbor to get their neo-con agenda through," she told a cheering crowd at San Francisco State University last April.

    That crowd, by the way, was holding a rally in support of Lynne Stewart, a radical New York attorney convicted in 2003 of aiding and abetting a terrorist conspiracy. Sheehan compared Stewart -- who served as a liaison between her incarcerated client, terrorist mastermind Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman, and his network outside -- to Atticus Finch, the lawyer in ''To Kill a Mockingbird" who heroically defends a black man falsely accused of raping a white woman in the Jim Crow South.

    Even more troubling opinions have surfaced in an e-mail Sheehan sent to ABC News last April: ''Am I emotional? Yes, my first born was murdered. Am I angry? Yes, he was killed for lies and for a PNAC [Project for the New American Century, a neoconservative think thank] Neo-Con agenda to benefit Israel. My son joined the army to protect America, not Israel."

    After some media outlets publicized these comments, which smack of blaming the Jews for drawing the U.S. into the war in Iraq, Sheehan disavowed them: she claims the offending lines were inserted into her email by an ABC News staffer. (The original email has been lost due to an Internet virus attack.) But this latest conspiracy-mongering is hard to believe, especially given the general anti-Israel tenor of Sheehan's public statements: for instance, she railed against the notion that ''it's okay for Israel to have nuclear weapons, but Iran or Syria better not get nuclear weapons."

    A comment on the left-wing website Daily Kos described Sheehan as ''Terri Schiavo reincarnated." I believe this was meant as a compliment. But actually, the Sheehan circus has a lot in common with the Schiavo circus, none of it good. Both stories represent a triumph -- on different sides of the political divide -- of emotion- and sentiment-driven politics. Schiavo's parents could go off on paranoid, crazy, vitriolic rants, and enjoy a certain immunity by virtue of their unthinkable tragedy. The same is true of Sheehan.

    Sheehan's grief entitles her to sympathy, which is why I believe the president should have granted her the meeting she wanted. (On pragmatic grounds, it would have also taken the sting out of Sheehan's protest.) But her loss does not give her, as New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd has claimed, an ''absolute" moral authority -- any more than it would if her reaction to her son's death was to demand a US nuclear strike against the insurgents.

    [url]http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2005/08/22/the_cindy_sheehan_you_dont_know/[/url]

  2. #2
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    5,979
    Post Thanks / Like
    Only the lefties chose not to see through this phony pig and her agenda :pinocchio

  3. #3
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Philly
    Posts
    38,782
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=pope]Only the lefties chose not to see through this phony pig and her agenda :pinocchio[/QUOTE]

    yeah she has such an agenda - if only she had more kids to send to their deaths maybe she could run for President.

  4. #4
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    5,979
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=bitonti]yeah she has such an agenda - if only she had more kids to send to their deaths maybe she could run for President.[/QUOTE]

    He went on his own, she had nothing to do with it.

    So rallying for a lawyer who defends terrorists isn't someone who has an agenda? Yah she's just you're average soccer mom LMFAO.

  5. #5
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    4,430
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE]Sheehan compared Stewart...to Atticus Finch, the lawyer in ''To Kill a Mockingbird" who heroically defends a black man falsely accused of raping a white woman in the Jim Crow South.[/QUOTE]

    what a farce that is. Although fiction- in Mockingbird the defendant was innocent. Stewart's client was guilty as sin.

  6. #6
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Philly
    Posts
    38,782
    Post Thanks / Like
    Hating and character assassinating Cindy Sheehan is all well and good. Maybe she's a selfish you know what just like everyone says she is. I've said before there's nothing all that impressive about Sheehan as a person. What is notable is that the questions she asks (essentially Why are we in Iraq?) is the same question 6 out of 10 Americans are asking and Bush isn't answering.

    Even if we grant for the sake of argument that Cindy Sheehan hates America (just like Michael Moore) that doesn't change the facts of the situation. That doesn't change what's going on in Iraq and how it isn't at all like we wanted or planned it to go. That doesn't change the fact that there's a better chance of flying pigs then a stable Iraqi democracy that has any real impact on our national security. The premise of the war is flawed, the reasons that we are fighting the war are flawed - Cindy Sheehan didn't invent that line of thinking but she did start up the conversation.

    I can't speak for CIndy Sheehan I can only speak for myself. And I don't question this war because I hate America and want us to fail. I question this war because I love America and I want nothing but success for this country. Being stubborn and sticking to the program might not be the best thing for this country. Time will bear these truths out.

  7. #7
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,407
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=bitonti]Hating and character assassinating Cindy Sheehan is all well and good. Maybe she's a selfish you know what just like everyone says she is. I've said before there's nothing all that impressive about Sheehan as a person. What is notable is that the questions she asks (essentially Why are we in Iraq?) is the same question 6 out of 10 Americans are asking and Bush isn't answering.

    Even if we grant for the sake of argument that Cindy Sheehan hates America (just like Michael Moore) that doesn't change the facts of the situation. That doesn't change what's going on in Iraq and how it isn't at all like we wanted or planned it to go. That doesn't change the fact that there's a better chance of flying pigs then a stable Iraqi democracy that has any real impact on our national security. The premise of the war is flawed, the reasons that we are fighting the war are flawed - Cindy Sheehan didn't invent that line of thinking but she did start up the conversation.

    I can't speak for CIndy Sheehan I can only speak for myself. And I don't question this war because I hate America and want us to fail. I question this war because I love America and I want nothing but success for this country. Being stubborn and sticking to the program might not be the best thing for this country. Time will bear these truths out.[/QUOTE]

    Typical lib hypocrisy 101- it's not okay to tell the whole story unless it meets a liberal agenda.....otherwise it is character assassination

    one can only come to the conclusion that based on bitonti's defense of Sheehan in this thread that he to thought bombing Afgahnistan was wrong! :yes:

  8. #8
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Philly
    Posts
    38,782
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Come Back to NY]
    one can only come to the conclusion that based on bitonti's defense of Sheehan in this thread that he to thought bombing Afgahnistan was wrong! :yes:[/QUOTE]

    so what if i did does that make me a traitor? What have we accomplished in Afghanistan? It's still the most heavily land mined country in the world. Their only economy to speak of is heroin production. the entire country outside of Kabul is controlled by warlords. Pat Tillman got shot by his own men and we gave him a silver star for that.

    What exactly did invading Afghanistan accomplish? We can't even say for sure we eliminiated all their terrorist training grounds since we don't have control over the caves/mountains on the Paki border.

    CBNY - you tell me how this Afghanistan mission is such a necessity - I'm all ears. Keep in mind if it was such a necessity why did we send 140k troops to Iraq and 10k to Afghanistan? Securing Iraq is 14x more important to our government than Securing Afghanistan? (both of which we can't do).

    I'm all about feasibility. Realistically Afghanistan and Iraq are s--tholes now and they will be s--tholes 150 years from now. That's realism.

  9. #9
    All Pro
    Annoying Chowd

    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    6,264
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=bitonti]yeah she has such an agenda - if only she had more kids to send to their deaths maybe she could run for President.[/QUOTE]

    Her son was a GROWN MAN who resigned AFTER the war started and was killed after he VOLUNTEERED for a mission...

    Of course the criminal liberal media would never report these things though..

  10. #10
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    9,927
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=New England Hick]Her son was a GROWN MAN who resigned AFTER the war started and was killed after he VOLUNTEERED for a mission...

    Of course the criminal liberal media would never report these things though..[/QUOTE]
    ok, and your point is? it still doesnt change the fact that you are a new england patriots fan on a new york jets messageboard.

  11. #11
    All Pro
    Annoying Chowd

    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    6,264
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Come Back to NY][B]The Cindy Sheehan you don't know
    By Cathy Young, Globe Columnist [/B]

    Sheehan's first and foremost demand is that all American troops be brought home from Iraq immediately. On this scale, irrationality becomes dangerous. Even many of those who opposed the war in Iraq from the start are convinced that a quick pullout would be a disaster -- both for the Iraqis, and for all those who would suffer if Iraq became a fully operational terrorist base. Who will have to give account to the bereaved men and women whose loved ones will be killed as a result?

    But there's more than that to Sheehan's politics. She is not simply against the war in Iraq (and, as she told talk show host Chris Matthews on CNBC, against the war in Afghanistan as well). She has thrown in her lot with the hardcore Michael Moore left, and this less savory aspect of her crusade has been largely ignored by the respectful media.

    In her public appearances, Sheehan has not only called Bush ''the biggest terrorist in the world" but suggested that his ''band of neocons" deliberately allowed the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11 to happen: ''9/11 was their Pearl Harbor to get their neo-con agenda through," she told a cheering crowd at San Francisco State University last April.

    That crowd, by the way, was holding a rally in support of Lynne Stewart, a radical New York attorney convicted in 2003 of aiding and abetting a terrorist conspiracy. Sheehan compared Stewart -- who served as a liaison between her incarcerated client, terrorist mastermind Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman, and his network outside -- to Atticus Finch, the lawyer in ''To Kill a Mockingbird" who heroically defends a black man falsely accused of raping a white woman in the Jim Crow South.

    Even more troubling opinions have surfaced in an e-mail Sheehan sent to ABC News last April: ''Am I emotional? Yes, my first born was murdered. Am I angry? Yes, he was killed for lies and for a PNAC [Project for the New American Century, a neoconservative think thank] Neo-Con agenda to benefit Israel. My son joined the army to protect America, not Israel."

    After some media outlets publicized these comments, which smack of blaming the Jews for drawing the U.S. into the war in Iraq, Sheehan disavowed them: she claims the offending lines were inserted into her email by an ABC News staffer. (The original email has been lost due to an Internet virus attack.) But this latest conspiracy-mongering is hard to believe, especially given the general anti-Israel tenor of Sheehan's public statements: for instance, she railed against the notion that ''it's okay for Israel to have nuclear weapons, but Iran or Syria better not get nuclear weapons."

    A comment on the left-wing website Daily Kos described Sheehan as ''Terri Schiavo reincarnated." I believe this was meant as a compliment. But actually, the Sheehan circus has a lot in common with the Schiavo circus, none of it good. Both stories represent a triumph -- on different sides of the political divide -- of emotion- and sentiment-driven politics. Schiavo's parents could go off on paranoid, crazy, vitriolic rants, and enjoy a certain immunity by virtue of their unthinkable tragedy. The same is true of Sheehan.

    Sheehan's grief entitles her to sympathy, which is why I believe the president should have granted her the meeting she wanted. (On pragmatic grounds, it would have also taken the sting out of Sheehan's protest.) But her loss does not give her, as New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd has claimed, an ''absolute" moral authority -- any more than it would if her reaction to her son's death was to demand a US nuclear strike against the insurgents.

    [url]http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2005/08/22/the_cindy_sheehan_you_dont_know/[/url][/QUOTE]


    Some tidbits about the old cow....


    Sheehan had previously described Bush as sincere and sympathetic in her first meeting. According to an interview with her hometown paper, the Vacaville Reporter, Sheehan had said that although she was upset about the war, she decided not to confront the president — who clearly left a favorable impression: [b]"I now know he's sincere about wanting freedom for the Iraqis…. I know he's sorry and feels some pain for our loss. And I know he's a man of faith."[/b]

    Of that trip, Sheehan said: [b]"That was the gift the president gave us, the gift of happiness, of being together."[/b]


    Sheehan's changing accounts of her meeting with Bush are relevant to understanding the president's decision not to meet with her again. So are her descriptions of the president in a Dallas speech reported by leftist newsletter Counterpunch as a "lying bastard," a "maniac" and the leader of a "destructive neocon cabal." In an article for CommonDreams.org, she called that supposed cabal "the "biggest terrorist outfit in the world."

    She also has turned her son's death into a tax protest, refusing to pay her income taxes for 2004, the year her son died, reportedly saying in the Dallas speech: "You killed my son, George Bush, and I don't owe you a penny."


    Also, the old hag's husband, Patrick Sheehan, has filed for divorce and other members of her family have clearly distanced themselves from her protest

  12. #12
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    9,927
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=New England Hick]Some tidbits about the old cow....


    Sheehan had previously described Bush as sincere and sympathetic in her first meeting. According to an interview with her hometown paper, the Vacaville Reporter, Sheehan had said that although she was upset about the war, she decided not to confront the president — who clearly left a favorable impression: [b]"I now know he's sincere about wanting freedom for the Iraqis…. I know he's sorry and feels some pain for our loss. And I know he's a man of faith."[/b]

    Of that trip, Sheehan said: [b]"That was the gift the president gave us, the gift of happiness, of being together."[/b]


    Sheehan's changing accounts of her meeting with Bush are relevant to understanding the president's decision not to meet with her again. So are her descriptions of the president in a Dallas speech reported by leftist newsletter Counterpunch as a "lying bastard," a "maniac" and the leader of a "destructive neocon cabal." In an article for CommonDreams.org, she called that supposed cabal "the "biggest terrorist outfit in the world."

    She also has turned her son's death into a tax protest, refusing to pay her income taxes for 2004, the year her son died, reportedly saying in the Dallas speech: "You killed my son, George Bush, and I don't owe you a penny."


    Also, the old hag's husband, Patrick Sheehan, has filed for divorce and other members of her family have clearly distanced themselves from her protest[/QUOTE]
    [url]www.patriotsplanet.com[/url]

  13. #13
    All Pro
    Annoying Chowd

    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    6,264
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Jetfan16]ok, and your point is? it still doesnt change the fact that you are a new england patriots fan on a new york jets messageboard.[/QUOTE]

    I'd suggest you PM Sooth and ask him why there are so many Pats fans here.

    PS.... This is a political forum... Not a Jets forum.... ;)

  14. #14
    All Pro
    Annoying Chowd

    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    6,264
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Jetfan16][url]www.patriotsplanet.com[/url][/QUOTE]

    [url]www.ihateliberals.com[/url]

  15. #15
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    9,927
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=New England Hick]PS.... This is a political forum... Not a Jets forum.... ;)[/QUOTE]
    this goes beyond the patheticity of pats fans on jets board to stir up the crowd, this is the politics section of a jets message board. not good my friend, not good.

  16. #16
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    9,927
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=New England Hick][url]www.ihateliberals.com[/url][/QUOTE]
    those two sites go hand in hand because THEY BOTH SUCK. this is why you should look into joining one or the other or both.

  17. #17
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,407
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=New England Hick]I'd suggest you PM Sooth and ask him why there are so many Pats fans here.

    PS.... This is a political forum... Not a Jets forum.... ;)[/QUOTE]

    Liberal logic....think, act and speak like me or shut up.

  18. #18
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Philly
    Posts
    38,782
    Post Thanks / Like
    you know what's so ironic? While the good followers of George Bush are character assassinating this woman (as they have been trained to do with all of Bush's enemies) - the White House themselves are just hoping she will go away. The right wing hit machine is in full swing meanwhile the Prez handlers just want this woman to dissapear. By insulting and drawing attention to this woman, men like HIck actually undermine their party's intention! If it was up to the GOP no one would have ever heard of Cindy Sheehan. Attacking her, calling her a cow or a skank - that only invites more bad publicity in the court of public opinion!!! you'd think that common sense would prevail and guys like Hick would realize you can't inviscerate a war mom and get away with it - but they are doing it anyway! How does that make you look? A man that spends his time trying to belittle a woman who lost her son in combat. Of course she's irrational and guess what she has a right to be that way. Everyone knows that, except for the right wing hit machine. all i can say is keep churning out that bile boys, in the long run the court of public opinion will side with the mom who lost her son over the bitter internet junkies who lost nothing - every day of the week and twice on sundays. This has nothing to do with logic it's all about perception and the perception is you can't kick a woman who is down in a drainage ditch. Ignore that perception at your party's risk!

  19. #19
    All Pro
    Annoying Chowd

    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    6,264
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=bitonti]you know what's so ironic? While the good followers of George Bush are character assassinating this woman (as they have been trained to do with all of Bush's enemies) - the White House themselves are just hoping she will go away. The right wing hit machine is in full swing meanwhile the Prez handlers just want this woman to dissapear. By insulting and drawing attention to this woman, men like HIck actually undermine their party's intention! If it was up to the GOP no one would have ever heard of Cindy Sheehan. Attacking her, calling her a cow or a skank - that only invites more bad publicity in the court of public opinion!!! you'd think that common sense would prevail and guys like Hick would realize you can't inviscerate a war mom and get away with it - but they are doing it anyway! How does that make you look? A man that spends his time trying to belittle a woman who lost her son in combat. Of course she's irrational and guess what she has a right to be that way. Everyone knows that, except for the right wing hit machine. all i can say is keep churning out that bile boys, in the long run the court of public opinion will side with the mom who lost her son over the bitter internet junkies who lost nothing - every day of the week and twice on sundays. This has nothing to do with logic it's all about perception and the perception is you can't kick a woman who is down in a drainage ditch. Ignore that perception at your party's risk![/QUOTE]

    Are you kidding Bitonti?

    The things this old b!tch has said about the President and this country has opened her up to any type of criticism..

    She has called the President and other conservatives all kinds of names but, because she lost a son in Iraq, we're not supposed to fight back and call her what she really is?

    Ha... Maybe in your liberal world people are supposed to stick their heads in the sand when attacked but not in my world... We fight back....

    PS... I see she now has the 1968 crowd coming to her aid....

    That ought to turn most Vietnam vets Republican.... :D

  20. #20
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    4,430
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=New England Hick]Are you kidding Bitonti?

    The things this old b!tch has said about the President and this country has opened her up to any type of criticism..

    She has called the President and other conservatives all kinds of names but, because she lost a son in Iraq, we're not supposed to fight back and call her what she really is?

    Ha... Maybe in your liberal world people are supposed to stick their heads in the sand when attacked but not in my world... We fight back....

    PS... I see she now has the 1968 crowd coming to her aid....

    That ought to turn most Vietnam vets Republican.... :D[/QUOTE]

    Hick, her son was KIA, we should therefore accept everything she has to say without hesitation or criticism, didnt you know that?

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us