Protesters
- Thread starter Eghad
- Start date
Joab,
That was a direct quote from your first post on the subject.
I think that people's reasons for protesting the war are as varied as people's reasons for owning guns. Some are noble, some aren't, but pretending to know the contents of that many people's hearts is unlikely. Which makes insulting those people ridiculous.
This is a pro-gun board, not a pro-war board. You no idea how much of the membership you may be labeling "pathetic losers". In fact, you might want to think about that before insulting any large group of people that may be members here.
That was a direct quote from your first post on the subject.
I think that people's reasons for protesting the war are as varied as people's reasons for owning guns. Some are noble, some aren't, but pretending to know the contents of that many people's hearts is unlikely. Which makes insulting those people ridiculous.
This is a pro-gun board, not a pro-war board. You no idea how much of the membership you may be labeling "pathetic losers". In fact, you might want to think about that before insulting any large group of people that may be members here.
exactly my point when something comes out we dont agree with the names start coming out.
Mrs. Sheehan has stated that she wants the war to end and American Troops withdrawn. She doesnt beleive in this war. That is her opinion. while I disagree with her I support her right to question the administration on this war. This is a function of democracy. Our founding fathers question the British monarchy on its policies and were called traitors. Luckily they didnt stop though and we have this nation to be thankful for.
I frown at those who use names....To me if I have to start the name calling I have already lost the superior position because I am appealing to feelings instead of logic. Or perhaps the argument the other side is making is hitting a little close to home.
Mrs. Sheehan has stated that she wants the war to end and American Troops withdrawn. She doesnt beleive in this war. That is her opinion. while I disagree with her I support her right to question the administration on this war. This is a function of democracy. Our founding fathers question the British monarchy on its policies and were called traitors. Luckily they didnt stop though and we have this nation to be thankful for.
I frown at those who use names....To me if I have to start the name calling I have already lost the superior position because I am appealing to feelings instead of logic. Or perhaps the argument the other side is making is hitting a little close to home.
Mike Irwin
Staff
I'm afraid I'm going to have to kick your butt for that, Eghad...
To clarify: When I said that they are giving aid and comfort, I meant that they are perceived to be doing so and then the enemy takes that perception as comfort because they see themselves "winning" by splitting the American people apart. So they will continue to do what they are doing because they believe that if they continue, then they will "win" the hearts and minds to their side, get America to run with tails between their legs, and then have the "good ol' days" of running rampant over the "lesser" people of the country while they live high on the hog (pun intended).
You have to remember that they get tv also. With our media spreading Cindy and the protestors all over the screen with little or no coverage of the protestors protesting Cindy and the anti-war protestors the enemy just sees what they are doing as "winning".
I think (so it's just my opinion) that a lot of what is being said by Cindy and the other anti-war protestors borders on treason. Especially the "America isn't worth fighting for" comment.
But, she has the right to do so, protest and run her mouth, even if it does give the enemy the wrongful thought that if they keep on doing what the are doing then more and more like Cindy will come out and they will win the hearts and minds of the American People, get America out of Iraq, go back to the "good ol' days" and then have time to plan another 9/11, just bigger and better.
Wayne
You have to remember that they get tv also. With our media spreading Cindy and the protestors all over the screen with little or no coverage of the protestors protesting Cindy and the anti-war protestors the enemy just sees what they are doing as "winning".
I think (so it's just my opinion) that a lot of what is being said by Cindy and the other anti-war protestors borders on treason. Especially the "America isn't worth fighting for" comment.
But, she has the right to do so, protest and run her mouth, even if it does give the enemy the wrongful thought that if they keep on doing what the are doing then more and more like Cindy will come out and they will win the hearts and minds of the American People, get America out of Iraq, go back to the "good ol' days" and then have time to plan another 9/11, just bigger and better.
Wayne
See first Ammendment, Freedom of Speech - If she was giving aid and comfort to the enemy she would be committing treason, therefore by your logic exercising the freedom of speech is an act of treason.
See first Ammendment, Freedom of Speech - she has the absolute right to say things like that - you on the other hand are not required to pay attention to her.
A matter of semantics - call them flower power children and it doesn't change any of the facts does it? Her words do not change anything, except as you allow them to. Are you actually concerned with what she is saying or with what other people are believing? Americans are allowed to believe what they wish.
See First Ammendment, right to Assembly. Are you saying that the sheik's lawyer is guilty of a criminal act in representing a criminal? See Ammendment 6 - Right to Counsel.
If you can demonstrate that she is on the payroll of a group that is financially supporting terrorist groups you should provide the evidence so that LE can investigate. A group can be for anything it wants to be for in America, it is their actions that may constitue a crime, not their beliefs.
Political parties such as the Communist Party are legal and protected under Ammendment 1, Freedom of Speech.
She has the right to her opinon on our actions in Afghanistan, and technically speaking I am not aware that Osama has been convicted of terrorism in a court of law in the USA - which makes the word alleged accurate.
Looney toons in my opinion but it goes over well in California.
Bottom line is that she is an American Citizen who is acting within the laws and within her rights. The publicity that she is receiving is a tribute to our Constitution, proving that one individual can sometimes communicate their opinion in such a way as to reach 300 million people.
The present administration is the one that is giving adi and comfort to the enemy imo....in the mismanagment of this war.
Did you know that we are making plans for 2009 to be in Iraq....
WW2 lasted from 1941-1945...why would Iraq take longer?
Desert Storm only took a few day s from the border to South of Baghdad
we are coming up on the 3rd anniversary of the Iraq war
things that make you go hrmmmmm
In my opinion Mrs. Sheehan has given to the support of the troops because she has caused this administration to get off it's collective ass and start paying attention.
When the enemy reads the paper in Iraq and it says we are making plans for 2009 thats all the aid and comfort they need because they know they are winning
Did you know that we are making plans for 2009 to be in Iraq....
WW2 lasted from 1941-1945...why would Iraq take longer?
Desert Storm only took a few day s from the border to South of Baghdad
we are coming up on the 3rd anniversary of the Iraq war
things that make you go hrmmmmm
In my opinion Mrs. Sheehan has given to the support of the troops because she has caused this administration to get off it's collective ass and start paying attention.
When the enemy reads the paper in Iraq and it says we are making plans for 2009 thats all the aid and comfort they need because they know they are winning
This very old thread about an earlier war is interesting. It looks like the majority here were vocal about their opposition to it. Could it be that we think disagreeing about a war with a Republican president borders on treason while disagreeing with a Democrat president is free speech? I think the emperor is more scantily dressed than we thought. 
Mike Irwin
Staff
Sigh...
"WW2 lasted from 1941-1945...why would Iraq take longer?"
After WW II we occupied Germany for nearly 5 years before returning full control to the Germans, and maintain a military presence there to this day.
WHY would Iraq take longer?
Maybe question/answer will fill you in on why...
What DIDN'T the German or Japanese people do after their leaders surrendered their military forces?
They DIDN'T rise up in an irregular guerilla campaign as is what has happened in Iraq. Had the Germans or Japanese done that, it would have been a lot longer, and a lot worse.
Combatting a civil insurrection is FAR different from waging a conventional war.
Apples to oranges question that any student of military history could readily answer for himself.
In this case, I know what makes me go hummmmmm...
"WW2 lasted from 1941-1945...why would Iraq take longer?"
After WW II we occupied Germany for nearly 5 years before returning full control to the Germans, and maintain a military presence there to this day.
WHY would Iraq take longer?
Maybe question/answer will fill you in on why...
What DIDN'T the German or Japanese people do after their leaders surrendered their military forces?
They DIDN'T rise up in an irregular guerilla campaign as is what has happened in Iraq. Had the Germans or Japanese done that, it would have been a lot longer, and a lot worse.
Combatting a civil insurrection is FAR different from waging a conventional war.
Apples to oranges question that any student of military history could readily answer for himself.
In this case, I know what makes me go hummmmmm...
What I don't see is why when we protest the protester we get jumped on by the tin foil hat crowd that is more intolerant and wants NO ONE to question anything they say under threat of arrest for disorderly or what ever they can think up. I know it galls allot of the lefties but the 1st. Amd. Works BOTH ways At least for now or until Cindy and her backers or some on this forum get into power then the rules will be so "tolerant" that no one outside of the camps will be able to say a word....
Edhad you did know that it took the US nearly six years to even write our constitution and agree on it right. Or are you so mind trapped by TV that you think you can cause all problems to go away in two 20 min sections with two ten min commercial breaks?
Butch50 YES that is what I am saying the lawyer was convicted in Federal Court of aiding terrorist operations by passing messages and orders out to his followers!!!!!
As to ANSWER the personnel are with her in Texas and by your logic since its a innocent organization only interested in exercising its rights what is to investigate? Proving that a well financed organization that hired a PR firm out of SF well known to handle assaults in the media on the US can under mine us in time of war. They plan to re do Vietnam and considering the types of sheepale inhabiting the US theys days they will likely win. Then the war can move to the shores of the US like they planned all along taking the first step on 911. But hey at least they will be exersising their rights...
Geez I was unaware that this forum had become linked to Moveon.org :barf:
Time to close it this assault has nothing to do with guns.
At least for now or until Cindy and her backers or some on this forum get into power then the rules will be so "tolerant" that no one outside of the camps will be able to say a word....Edhad you did know that it took the US nearly six years to even write our constitution and agree on it right. Or are you so mind trapped by TV that you think you can cause all problems to go away in two 20 min sections with two ten min commercial breaks?
Butch50 YES that is what I am saying the lawyer was convicted in Federal Court of aiding terrorist operations by passing messages and orders out to his followers!!!!!
As to ANSWER the personnel are with her in Texas and by your logic since its a innocent organization only interested in exercising its rights what is to investigate? Proving that a well financed organization that hired a PR firm out of SF well known to handle assaults in the media on the US can under mine us in time of war. They plan to re do Vietnam and considering the types of sheepale inhabiting the US theys days they will likely win. Then the war can move to the shores of the US like they planned all along taking the first step on 911. But hey at least they will be exersising their rights...
Geez I was unaware that this forum had become linked to Moveon.org :barf:
Time to close it this assault has nothing to do with guns.
What I find objectionable are attacks against her protestation, instead of attacks against what she is saying, in a logical manner. Counter her arguments logically all day long and I may join in with you, but holler and scream about her protesting because you don't like what she says and I automatically want to defend her right of protest - I may want to protest some day too and I want that right to remain unabridged. You may want to protest some day; and if you do guess what, I will be the first to defend your right to protest whether I agree with you or not.
I get your concerns Butch but try protesting in ANSWER'S Americka.
Cindy is pretending for the media mostly on her side to be one thing, she is something totally different in her agenda and plans. There is nothing wrong with pointing that out.
“All that is required for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing”
Cindy is pretending for the media mostly on her side to be one thing, she is something totally different in her agenda and plans. There is nothing wrong with pointing that out.
“All that is required for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing”
Sulaco2 you are 100% right - there is nothing wrong with arguing against what she says, or disagreeing with what she stands for, or not agreeing with her or her position or her supporters in any way. As long as you do it logically.
Threatening her with violence, saying that she has no right to say what she says, calling her names, being emotionally obtuse - those are for children who are still in grade school.
Threatening her with violence, saying that she has no right to say what she says, calling her names, being emotionally obtuse - those are for children who are still in grade school.
No it was a potion of a quote, which was my point of contention.
I already reposted the entire quote in response to your selective cut and paste job but here goes again
Reread my exact quote it is posted above for your convenience
So the people protesting the war by labeling the president as a Nazi and the soldiers as dupes is a freedom of speech thing but my protesting the protesters actions by labeling some of them as pathetic losers and cowards is insulting.