Sorry, I don't think Cindy ever helped the anti-war movement

[Cronus Protagonist]

She led it. And is leading it now. Cindy Sheehan has the moral standing to tear down the wall and she's doing it brick by brick.

http://brainbuttons.com/home.asp?stashid=13
Buttons for brainy people - educate your local freepers today!

[roguevalley]

1. agreed. she gave a unified vision toward peace. she is a great

woman and a leader.

[Cronus Protagonist]

2. Ywah, I don't get how anyone on our side could claim she's "not helping"

It just doesn't compute. She IS the anti-war movement, or at least she's the heart of it, which is splitting hairs, really.

[electropop]

41. Must have been freeper trolls.

It's preposterous on its face. Cindy is the first antiwar person to get lots of media. She has moral standing, and the perfect image for TV.

[jmatthan]

3. Cindy Sheehan is not Anti War

She is Pro Peace.

There is a big difference between these two stands.

She is against an illegal invasion and occupation.

She wants the troops home now from the illegal occupation.

She has not received an answer to her question as what is the Noble Cause her son, Casey, died for.

http://jmpolitics.blogspot.com/2005/09/cindy-arrested.html

[Cronus Protagonist]

8. Well, when there's a war on and people protest it...

it's a given that one means the current war and not war in general.

[Fridays Child]

4. She's not stage-managed. She's not "handled" by cynical PR pros...

She's not "packaged." She's just a grieving mother who, every day, turns her unbearable sorrow to a higher purpose. And that's what blows people away.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

5. Man, your subject line had me composing a Message Deleted

thanks for that surprise...

[Cronus Protagonist]

7. I'm famous for posting trojan honeypots

I find it attracts the right crowd :)

[A-Schwarzenegger]

9. "trojan honeypots"!

That could be from Terry Southern,
you image-maker, you.

[Kire]

24. I'm still confused.

it sounds like she is tearing down the wall that is the anti-war movement

if she led it, then isn't that helping it?

[electropop]

43. I think the OP meant the Bush Regime "stonewall"

against revealing the true reasons for the war.

[Kire]

62. ok, so doesn't that help the anti-war movement?

[Hissyspit]

6. She's doing SOMETHING!

Somebody has to do something!

I went to D.C. and marched this weekend. Did I do the right thing? Yes. Did it do any good? Who the f'ing hell knows??? But I did something...

[AtomicKitten]

10. tuned in for the fireworks

and was surprised by the switcheroo. Good one.
Love your 86-43 button. Does it come in a bumper sticker?

[electropop]

44. I've thought up an even shorter one:

"F.W."

[Matilda]

11. As someone who can remember the Vietnam protests,

I've been thinking for quite a while that the movement needs an
Abbie Hoffmann or a Daniel Berrigan to inpsire popular opinion.

It's found it in Cindy Sheehan.

[KharmaTrain]

12. Cindy = Rosa Parks...A Start

Cindy was the first person to put a face to opposition to this invasion. She had a simple question and just based on that alone, her stand for demanding an answer really is inspirational. I didn't see any other original motivation than a lady pained with the loss of her son and the lack of a government response to explain why this happened. It's the question all mothers ask during a war, and a moral government would take the time to answer that question, this one not only refused to answer, it went running from her and trying to destroy her.

Cindy got caught up in the celebrity and synergy of the emotions she lit. She attracted thousands of us to support her either with money or shoe leather or both...as long as it was directed at this war and bringing the regime in Washington into account. Cindy's problem was she was human and "went off script".

I'm sure had there been talk radio when Ghandi was around, he might have blurted something on a friendly show that would have used by Rush Ali Baba to slam him...or a post on a blog would have been emailed across world in minutes.

Cindy became a symbol to many of us...not for what she said, but what she was standing for. Others have seen her mission differently. She formed common cause with many of these groups...that helped publicize and energize her protest and this is wehre things started going off the tracks for some. My jury remains out.

One thing I've long felt is that Cindy was just a start...a person many could relate to...a face to the horrible toll this country is taking with this war and this regime. Now there's a need for someone to step forward and better articulate the message. A leader needs to step forward to clarify the vision and message of the anti-war movement...similar to how Dr. King refined Rosa Park's intial protest.

I sense a lot of the angst here is we're all hoping for that leader and none has come to the front. Or at least one that people can rally around.

Peace...

[Binka]

13. Thanks KT What A Fabulous Post

I just nominated this thread based on the wonderful and intelligent replies. Hey Cronus "Trojan Honey pot" is brilliant. I might change my user name!

[Cronus Protagonist]

64. True dat

werd. :)

[sam sarrha]

14. where you been.. watching FAUX media Theater..?? what a dumb thing to say

[Binka]

15. Sam Did You Read The Entire Post?

Um it's called tongue in cheek, or satire, or spoof, or irony.....please read the post again and I'm sure you will understand.

[txindy]

26. So, you don't think Cindy is leading the anti-war movement in the USA?

Who is, then? :shrug:

[beingthere]

16. Cindy gives heart and hope when so badly needed.

[Maine-ah]

17. agreed.

I was almost ready to say "WTF are you talking about", but I always make sure to read the whole post.

I think she gave the anti-war movement a kick in the ass. I don't think there would have been nearly as many in DC if she hadn't gone and sat outside W's "ranch".

[B Calm]

18. Don't forget, it was George Bush who USED her son to further

his AGENDA!

[Tsiyu]

19. Yeehaw

agreed.

Anyone who disagrees needs to stay well away from me today....

[Walt Starr]

20. She proved something on Saturday that so many were afraid to admit

She proved that A.N.S.W.E.R. needs the anti-war movement one helluva lot more than the anti-war movement needs A.N.S.W.E.R.

In fact, I'd go so far as to say she proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the anti-war movement doesn't need A.N.S.W.E.R. at all!

[Stockholm]

21. Why do you dislike that organisation so much?

I have seen your crusade around DU against A.N.S.W.E.R and I must admit I don´t know much about them so I went to their website and from the look of it it seems like a rather big tent (reminds me of another place) with a myriad of organisations supporting their work. According to their website they urged the protestors on the 24th to raise the voice about the follwing:

Stop the War in Iraq
End Colonial Occupation from Iraq to Palestine to Haiti
Support the Palestinian People’s Right of Return
Stop the Threats Against Venezuela, Cuba, Iran & North Korea
U.S. Out of the Philippines
U.S. Out of Puerto Rico
Bring all the troops home now
Stop the Racist, anti-Immigrant and anti-Labor Offensive at Home, Defend Civil Rights
Military Recruiters Out of Our Schools and Communities

What in this do you not agree with? I feels like I am missing some crucial information here. And of course is there a need for people to support everything?

[Walt Starr]

23. Look at your list!

The support of "Palestinian right of return" is thinly veiled anti-semitism. All you have to do is listen to one of their speakers on the subject for five minutes.

U.S. out of Puerto Rico is anti-democratic. Every last time it has come up for a vote of the people of Puerto Rico, it fails. Puerto Rico wants to remain a territory of the United States.

They support Castro and Kim Jong Il??? How can they support two of the wrost despots in the world?

Look at the organizations that make it up. It is a Communist organization that supports violent overthrow of capitalism.

[Czolgosz]

31. "Look at your list!" = "She's a witch!"

Burn them all!

[Walt Starr]

32. Oh yes...right.

:eyes:

Rhetorical bullshit notwithstanding.

[Czolgosz]

42. The frantic declaration “look at your list!” stinks of knee-jerk panic and

The frantic declaration “look at your list!” stinks of knee-jerk panic and offers no insight into any reason why someone should oppose any of the groups listed. I am admittedly not overly familiar with all the groups that comprise ANSWER, but what you write about some of the groups is hogwash.

You first say “Palestinian right of return is thinly veiled anti-semitism.” That’s an outrageous suggestion to make without any support. To support your serious accusation, you should be able to disprove the Palestine Right to Return Coalition’s primary goals are to educate about legal and moral issues concerning Palestinian refugees and to address the situation where, prior to the foundation of Israel, Palestinian Arabs who were indigenous to those lands were expelled from their lands, and most are still barred from access to those lands and from citizenship in Israel. You and I should both enjoy the right to criticize (even to harshly criticize) the current U.S. government without fear of being labeled as bigots against the American people so why can’t the Coalition criticize the Israeli government without fear of being labeled as bigots against the Jewish people?

You say “U.S. out of Puerto Rico is anti-democratic” because “every last time it has come up for a vote of the people of Puerto Rico, it fails.” First, all that many of the U.S. out of Puerto Rico advocates want is the U.S. military out of Puerto Rico, only some of those advocate want full Puerto Rican independence. Second, even with respect to those who want full Puerto Rican independence, it is crazy to label such a movement is “anti-democratic.” Let me draw you an analogy by restating your argument with gay civil unions in place of Puerto Rican independence: “The advocates for the recognition of gay civil unions are anti-democratic because every last time it has come up for a vote of the people from numerous different states, it has failed.” That statement is outrageous (as was yours about U.S. out of Puerto Rico) because being on the losing side of a ballot referendum does not mean that those who still fight for the cause are “anti-democratic.” I would think anyone who supports the Democratic Party would agree that even Karl Rove should be ashamed to make such an argument.

Finally, your arguments about “Castro and Kim Jong Il” and the “Communist organization that supports violent overthrow of capitalism” are too paranoid and flawed for me to debunk in one sitting. Nevertheless, I will try if you think it will help. I breaks my heart to see such in fighting among groups that share more goals than not.

If Karl Rove can bring the amoral pro-corporatists together with the hyper-judgmental dominionist theocrats under one Republican banner, you’d think we could at least avoid calling each other anti-democratic bigots seeking the violent overthrow of capitalism.

[Walt Starr]

46. I have no common cause with ANSWER

not a bit.

I did my homework and I know what the fuck they are.

Make common cause witht ehm if you choose, I stay away from Communists and Anti-Semites.

[Czolgosz]

48. The question isn't whether or not to "make" common cause with ANSWER.

If you are anti-war, have a common cause with ANSWER.

I don't support everything ANSWER supports, but it does not work simply to withdraw into a cocoon because of ANSWER.

Guess what. . .

I also don't support everything Joe Lieberman supports, but it wouldn't work to withdraw into a cocoon because of Lieberman, either.

I also don't support everything Joe Biden supports, but it wouldn't work to withdraw into a cocoon because of Biden, either.

I also don't everything the DNC supports, but it wouldn't work to withdraw into a cocoon because of the DNC, either.

Withdrawal in the face of opposition is cowardice. But withdrawal in the face of "we agree about some things but I won't make common cause with them because we don't agree about everything" is so weak-kneed it doesn't even have proper name.

[Walt Starr]

50. Here's a big difference

Lieberman, Biden and I are all Democrats.

Answer includes a violently communistic organization which advocates the violent overthrow of capitalism.

Again, I have no common cause with ANSWER.

[Czolgosz]

53. I am also a Democrat. I don't know who you are referring to as violent

anti-capitalists, but you are aware -- aren't you -- that it is illegal in the U.S. to engage "in armed hostility against the United States" as well as other acts of sedition? 18 U.S.C. §§ 2381, 2390. This makes me think your claims that ANSWER is comprised of organizations which advocate "the violent overthrow of capitalism" are grotesquely exaggerated because our Attorney General would shut them down in a heartbeat if there was even a whiff of truth to your implication that ANSWER is a threat to the U.S.

[Walt Starr]

55. Then you had damned well better do your homework

Read the Socialism and Liberation Party (An ANSWER founding organization) web site@

[Czolgosz]

58. I don't agree with much of the Socialism and Liberation Party, but NOWHERE

do I see where it advocates violence (the idea of revolution does not imply violence, if that's what you were thinking).

Moreover, there are somethings on the website I agree with:

1. In place of greed, domination and exploitation, we stand for solidarity, friendship and cooperation between all peoples.

AGREED

2. Millions of people poured into the streets in the last few years to prevent Bush and Cheney's rush to war against Iraq, only to find that this imperialist war had the backing of both political parties of U.S. imperialism, of the big business media, of the corporations and the banks.

AGREED

3. The protests were huge—the biggest anti-war demonstrations ever. The anti-war movement spanned the globe. It was an historic demonstration of unity by the people of all continents uniting against U.S. imperialism. Yet the war machine pushed ahead.

AGREED

4. Today, tens of thousands of Iraqis are dead. Thousands of GIs, workers in uniform, have been killed or wounded, with more being sent to their deaths daily.

AGREED

5. Since 1945, every generation has been called on to send its sons and daughters to invade foreign lands: Korea, Vietnam, Dominican Republic, Cambodia, Laos, Lebanon, Grenada, Panama, Iraq, Somalia, Haiti, Yugoslavia, Afghanistan.... Today it is Iraq. Tomorrow it will be others. The Pentagon now has a network of 750 military bases located in 130 countries—not to mention the 6,000 bases inside the U.S. and its territories.

AGREED (IF WE DON'T TURN THE NEO-CONs OUT OF OFFICE)

6. Disguised under the label of a free market economy, U.S. capitalism has evolved into the most highly centralized form of state monopoly capitalism. The banks, the concentrated media monopolies, the transnational corporations—especially the oil and energy conglomerates—and the Pentagon have merged into a permanent warfare state.... To secure lasting peace and justice requires abolishing the dictatorship of the super-rich and their warfare state.

NOT AGREED, BUT I AGREE THESE CONCERNS ARE NOT SEDITIOUS

Do I agree with the rest of the Socialism and Liberation Party's agenda? No. But I don't agree with the entirety of the Democratic, Republican, or Green Party agendas, either. No one is saying that you should join the Socialism and Liberation Party (in fact, I want you with me in the Democratic Party). But if you are not afraid to march against the Republican Party, why should be afraid to march near the Socialism and Liberation Party?

[Walt Starr]

60. I'll never again underestimate the naivte on DU

:eyes:

[Czolgosz]

61. Why? Do you disagree with the points I set out? I can probably find

twice as many points where I agree with the Republican Party, and 100 times as many points where I agree with the Green Party.

I'm not afraid I'll get political cooties from having limited areas of agreement with some party that I generally disagree with. Is that hat you are calling naive?

[stickdog]

63. Please "answer" the charges instead of dodging them, Walt.

I think ANSWER definitely needs to take a class in political framing and salesmanship, and I also suspect that they might even be an elite-driven far left gatekeeper organization.

However, some of your irrational, alarmist methods of tearing ANSWER down sounds a lot like red baiting to me.

Do you believe in workers' rights? Economic justice? Self-determination?

Just wondering, because much ANSWER supports is not even questionable, AFAIAC.

[jonnyblitz]

33. that is sad you buy the david horowitz definition of anti-semitism.

i believe the minutemen on the arizona border that you supported might have been a bit more anti-semitic and you had no problem with them.

[Walt Starr]

34. I buy the ADL definition of anti-semitism

And I've listened to their rhetoric. It is anti-semitic.

[K-W]

36. No, supporting the rights of Palestinians is not anti-semitic. EOM

[Walt Starr]

39. ADL definition EOM

[Sparkman]

38. should Palestinians, or American Indians, have their own lands, waltS?

Just a Q for U?

[Walt Starr]

47. Loaded questioin

and has little to nothing to do with ANSWER.

[Czolgosz]

54. If a loaded question is one you can't answer without losing your argument,

then I agree that this was a loaded question.

[Walt Starr]

56. It's a loaded question because it's not as simple as "yes" or "no"

and you know damned good and well that's the case.

If you had ever read any of my posts related to Israel and Palestione, you'd also know I've been highly critical of Israel, especially Sharon.

The difference now is Israel has acted in good faith within the Gaza Strip. It is now time for Palestinians (and Hamas) to reciprocate.

This moves the process forward and peace is achievable when both sides act in good faith.

But again, even this explanation of my poisition on the matter is too simplistic.

[Czolgosz]

59. Then we agree that it is time for Palestinians and Hamas to act in good

faith. I have neither seen nor heard anything about the Palestinian Right of Return advocates that makes me think that they disagree with that idea. In fact, I had understood that the Palestinian Right of Return advocates were a group that sought to address the issue through legal recourse and international courts rather than through violence. If I am wrong, tell me where I'm wrong. I am not ineducable.

BTW, I think there is an interesting question whether Israel is acting with good faith in the Gaza Strip. I have seen some argue, fairly persuasively, that Israel's actions in the Gaza Strip are motivated by the political desire to segregate the Palestinians outside of Israel proper because as the Palestinian population within Israel proper was growing so rapidly (due to the relatively higher birth rate) that it was becoming a demographic time bomb in Israel. I am not advocating this view, not disputing it, because it's a complicated question which I am not informed enough to fully discuss. It does strike me as an interesting issue.

[Stockholm]

67. I will continue to study answer

But I am afraid your contribution in this thread has done little to sway my opinion. After yelling anti-semitism etc. the burden lies on you to provide arguments to support your views, directing people to their website is not enough (and I even went there to look for support of your views).

EOM.

[K-W]

35. Bullshit. EOM

[bpilgrim]

57. "support of "Palestinian right of return" is thinly veiled anti-semitism"

:eyes:

peace

[Bridget Burke]

25. They're Reds!

They are out to subvert your children's minds & pollute your precious bodily fluids.

(I'm NOT nostalgic for the 50's!)

[chefgirl]

22. I completely agree

She promised to 'drive a political stake into the black heart of this president' and, by God, she is keeping that promise.

Her moral standing is, indeed, unimpeachable.

Every move the little idiot and his minions make against her, only justifies her cause (and ours) even more, while shining the disinfecting light of truth right back at the White House.

With the example she sets, its no wonder to me that she raised such a son as her beloved Casey.

And here was I, thinking there were no heroes left!

-chef-

[Lerkfish]

27. she is a heroic catalyst for movements already ongoing...

I don't think she started the movement, but she is helping to give it a new focus and helping the voices to be finally heard.

[seeker4ever]

28. Can we start reading the posts before responding?

We don't wanna be morans now do we?

[Turn CO Blue]

29. Good one! Had me going for a second or two... n/t

[UrbScotty]

37. Me too!

:evilgrin:

[Cronus Protagonist]

65. haha - I was tired of the long anti Cindy thread taking up my head space

This was more fun

:evilgrin:

[Vinnie From Indy]

30. Another BS Thread Title

You must have strained your arm patting yourself on the back with this bit of wittiness.

[Bridget Burke]

40. Did your post originally agree with the title?

When you actually figured out what was going on, you had to edit...

[Marleyb]

45. Cindy's beautiful voice and determined stand

has given so many people the courage to start using their voice, and make their stand in their own communities. The anti-war movement was already in full swing, we just needed a leader, and once she showed up it just blossomed. Just look at how the numbers of people against the war have grown, who now support immediate withdrawal....62%!!!!

Thank JAH for Cindy!

I was so inspired by what another DUer wrote the other day, about how it took 40,000 troop deaths before people really started protesting in the 60's. Maybe we have learned something from Vietnam afterall.

And look at the progress we have made, without any help from most of our politicians. Congratulations all! Now we need to get congress in line, or throw their asses out.

[txaslftist]

49. Hell, she IS it.

[Cronus Protagonist]

66. You echo my point exactly

tru dat.

[leftofthedial]

51. I admire her more than I can say.

She has been the focal point, the lightning rod and the most abiding symbol

AND she is politically immune from their attacks because she is not the typical politician with who knows what skeletons in the closet. Rove is helpless.

[Mr_Spock]

52. It wasn't called a "movement" until she showed up in Texas.

Look for any references to an "anti-war movement" prior to Cindy.

She has been the impetus from the beginning of this latest anti-war movement.