Cindy Sheehan: “Petty and Cruel Dictator”

[babylonsister]

Posted with permission.

“Petty and Cruel Dictator”
Cindy Sheehan

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad the president of Iran spoke at Columbia University today. I heard that he was invited there because the President of Columbia wanted to foster a “free exchange of ideas.” Even though I am not an Ahmadinejad supporter, I know he was elected in Iran in a knee-jerk and understandable response to the USA’s bloodily unnecessary invasion of Iraq, as many reactionery governments have been elected in that region and all over the world in response to the spreading US corporate and military empire.

Citing such human rights’ violations in the form of imprisonment and executions, the President of Columbia University, very boorishly said that Ahmadinejad appeared to be a “petty and cruel dictator.” First of all, how does one invite someone to your place for a “free exchange of ideas,” and be such a rude American? Did he only invite Ahmadinejad so he could publicly scold him or to become the darling of Fox News?

Secondly, what about our President who appears to be a “petty and cruel dictator?” George Bush presided over a stunning amount of executions when he was Governor of Texas and the US is operating torture prison camps, openly and secretly, all over the world. BushCo has fought the Supreme Court and Congress for the right to hold thousands of humans without their human rights of due process and they have also been strenuously committed to the strategy of torture---or “enhanced interrogation methods” as the Ministry of Truth likes to call it. A Reverend gets beaten down in the halls of Congress; nooses are being hung in the south; students are being tased on campuses and Congress is censuring Freedom of Speech…how much evidence do we need before we decide that something is profoundly wrong in present-day America?

In 2006, China, the leading practitioner of state sanctioned murder in the form of execution, killed 8000 people in this manner. However, the Premier of China is welcomed to the US by George Bush who is probably envious of President Hu Jintao's record. We borrow vast sums from China to wage our wars and China is our major trading partner. Wal-Mart’s cheap and dangerous crap is manufactured by near slaves there, but somehow that is okay? Somehow it is okay to welcome Communist China with open arms, but demonize and disparage a Socialist like Hugo Chavez of Venezuela? America has a very lucrative prison business and is the only country in the Americas that practices execution. A barbarian is a barbarian no matter what color, religion or nationality they are.

George Bush has added signing statements to almost 1000 bills that he has signed into law saying that he doesn’t have to obey those very same laws. We have the Nazi-ist sounding Department of Homeland Security which seems to be obsessed with keeping my un-zip-locked baggied lip-gloss off of flights. The un-Patriot Act and breaking of FISA laws and our 4th Amendment right to be secure against unreasonable search and seizure have turned the “Land of the Free” into the “Home of the Slaves.”

To put the cherry on the sundae of the crimes that BushCo have committed, they have sent hundreds of thousands of our own sons and daughters to occupy a country that was no threat to America or its neighbors. Thousands of Americans are dead, wounded or mentally screwed up and millions of Iraqis are dead, wounded, mentally screwed up or displaced from their homes.

Another boorish American, Scott Pelley (of 60 Minutes) hammered Ahmadinejad about sending weapons into Iraq without even once acknowledging the immoral tons of weapons that we rained on the citizens of Iraq during “shocking and awful;” the cluster bombs that look like toys that litter the killing fields of that country and have killed and maimed so many children; the mercenary killers that outnumber our troops and use the people of Iraq for target practice; the thousands of tons of weapons that the US let out of such weapons dumps as al-Qaqaa that were left unguarded while the oil ministry was heavily fortified. Not to mention that America supported Iraq in its eight year long war with Iran that killed an unbelievable amount of people on both sides of the border. The hypocrisy of our system is spectacular and deadly in both ignorance and arrogance.

We here in America are living in a fascist state that regularly puts corporate profits and an insatiable and evil thirst for power above people and their needs. Our supercilious leaders and media are so busy calling the kettle black, they don’t notice or care how dark our pot is. We are supporting Israel in their human rights violations against Palestine, illegally occupying two countries on our own and we have the nerve to claim any kind of moral superiority over anybody?

The fascist, near dictatorship of the Bush regime (a la Nazi Germany) has even intimidated universities to align with their hypocritical murderous rhetoric. Universities should feel free to invite anyone to speak to open much needed dialogue in our country and in the world. And if a person is invited, they should be treated by the person who invited them with a slight modicum of courtesy and then let the rocking and rolling begin with the “Q & A”…which would truly be a free exchange of ideas. I am surprised President Bollinger didn’t have President Ahmadinejad tased.

Peace is going to take all the nations working in cooperation to limit naked aggression and human rights’ violations, not just the ones which the US declare as evil. How many nukes do we have? How many does Pakistan have? How many does India, Israel, North Korea, and the former Soviet Union have? Should the rhetoric be about destroying all weapons of mass destruction and not just prohibiting Iran from obtaining one?

Many countries are committing human rights' violations and sending arms and troops into many parts of the world. America's biggest export is violence and we would do well to call for an end to all occupations and violence by beginning to end our own.

Let’s clean our own filthy house before we criticize someone else for theirs.

[Zomby Woof]

1. Cindy

You don't do your son's memory justice with addled tripe like that.

[LittleClarkie]

14. Did you want to explain why you think it's addled tripe?

Just in the interest of discussion?

[truth2power]

35. Yes, I'd be interested in hearing why he thinks its tripe, also. n/t

[spoony]

56. here's why:

Because it is in no way illegitimate, hypocritical, or inconsistent to criticise both. We're TRYING to "clean our house," so why does that mean we cannot simultaneously notice or comment on other corrupt leadership?

[Malikshah]

90. We're not trying to bomb the hell out of ourselves....

There is the problem.

It's much easier to hate than to think.

[SemperEadem]

88. wow

that comment was fucked up, s0n.

[JackRiddler]

98. This is the common technique of the "preemptive puke"

Rush into a thread you want to slam and say something like

"Oh no not this shit again"

or

"Where's my tinfoil hat"

or

"Stop it - you're destroying the Party"

or

"Nyah nyah toilet head."

The latter is surely the most effective riposte in the second-grade arsenal!

[Sufficient Voice]

99. Okay Look.

Call her writing tripe all you want. I don't think this article is particularly insightful or anything. In fact, I agree with you that we should be critical of both at the same time.

BUT, it is not YOUR place at all to tell a mother what does her 'son's memory justice' and what doesn't! To place your criticism in that context is both cruel and foolish. Cindy makes herself an easy target by putting herself out there so much. Despite that, remember, she has lost a child. That alone deserves at least tack, if you are unable to muster respect. Please think about what it means to loose a child, and get back to me.

[flordehinojos]

110. thank you, cindy sheehan, for having the courage to speak truth to power, and

for not being intimidated by all of those who want to make you feel guilty for your right to speak truth to power.

[Plucketeer]

111. The very MOMENT.........

.........I heard the university head suggest his guest was a "cruel and petty dictator", I had to check if he'd invited Bush to speak instead! Taunting Ahm-a-dim-jihad was coarse as far as I see it. Especially in light of the dimwit leader we've saddled ourselves with.

:kick:Bush

[flordehinojos]

126. i sooo agree with you.

really. we have our own "cruel and petty dictator" right here and bollinger doesn't seem to be faced by that.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

2. K&R for Cindy's ability to cut through the BS and pinpoint the hyprocrisy.

[Auggie]

3. K&R!!!!

[Cha]

4. Cindy does her son Casey's memory

proud with her common decency and humanity.

Clean our own house? Oh Cindy, you the buSHITS aren't going to do that and neither are the corporatemediawhores.

[eleny]

5. I'd like to see us clean up our act, too

Thank you, Cindy.

[Name removed]

6. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[CreekDog]

45. She won't win

She won't come close, I haven't even seen her in the district recently. And yes, Pelosi has been here.

[cali]

7. Oh dear, I wish she'd write something that wasn't a muddle

She's running for Congress; she should know the primary reason Ahmadinejad was elected was economic worry, not the U.S. invasion. And furthermore, many reactionary governments have not been elected in the region, and even the election of Hamas had far more to do with the corruption of Fatah than anything else. Time for foreign affairs 101 for Cindy.

After the first paragraph it's the usual mish mash of some good points and many bizarre comments.

She's all over the map, dashing from one irrelevancy to another.

She just can't write.

[cobalt1999]

54. Good summary

She could use a good editor and some education for perspective.

[bluedog]

58. check out her garble on Buzzflash articles

she usually has at least 2 a week........her ramblings........ and thats what they are go on and on and on .....

[Baby Snooks]

96. A muddled reflection of a muddled mess called the USA

Muddled or not she is saying what all the Democratic candidates for president should be saying. And won't.

If she's "all over the map" maybe it's because this administration is "all over the map" as are quite a few Democrats who support the administration while claiming they do not. Pelosi in particular.

And she makes a good point as to why Ahmadinejad was invited to Columbia - was it to provide the Bush Administration with public sentiment in favor of bombing the hell out of an Iranian Hitler?

The public sentiment should focus on the American Hitler. And on those who seem intent on keeping him in office.

[cali]

116. er, no. the dem candidates should not be saying what she's saying

If they did, we'd have another puke for president. and one of the reasons she'll be soundly defeated is her poor rhetoric. And no, ahmadinejad was not invited to columbia to put on a show for bush. the reason bollinger acted the boor, was out of fear of losing funding, nothing to do with bush. it may have been craven, but it wasn't a conspiracy. bush is leaving office in 15 months or so. the dems aren't intent in keeping him in office, they're simply afraid of the risk of impeachment. again, craven perhaps, but not evidence in the slightest that they want to keep him in office.

cindy demonstrates no critical thinking skills at all.

except to a small number of people, she irrelevant re the political discourse.

[peacetalksforall]

128. I believe it is irrelevant to attack her writing, her rhetoric - who the

heck cares? The issues are what matters and the issue is the hypocrisy of U.S. leaders attacking him - at this point in time - a U.N. invited guest and a Columbia invited guest.

I see this as helping Dick Cheney and Israel with their bombing plan. Any act that shows our Dem leaders standing with Jeff Sessions or Orrin Hatch or Rush Limbaugh in a disgraceful attack on a guest sickens me.

We are gross.

[renie408]

142. I tend to agree.

Her writing skill might not win her a Pulitzer, but I don't think that is what she is after.

[renie408]

101. I think she has the right idea

The idea behind the essay was sound. We tolerate behavior as bad as Iran's or worse in our economic partners and ignore activities that make Ahmadinejad look like a Boy Scout in places (Darfur)that hold no economic/military interest for us. I tend to agree that she needs some help with organization in her writing. I also think it sounds more like a post here than a polished essay/statement from a congressional candidate.

[knight_of_the_star]

115. I do have to agree with that

It doesn't really exactly seem to have a succinct point aside from rambling on about how bad Bush is.

[trekbiker]

120. ????

"Let’s clean our own filthy house before we criticize someone else for theirs."

whats so muddled about that??

she is right when she says the hard comments and questions should have been handled in the Q&A.

[cali]

133. it's not that last line, it's the

long and rambling paragraphs above it. And what about her ignorance on the Middle East? She made some egregious errors there.

[peacetalksforall]

127. Irrelvancy? Irrelvancy? Cali, are you kidding?

"Dashing from one irrelvancy to another?"

Man, that is the worst thing I've heard all day.

Why don't you give some examples of some that are irrelevant and why.

I found each point relevant.
It's what we discuss each day as they unfurl.
It was probably not a complete summation, but it had enough to make the point.

Yes, Cali, defend your statement, if you would.

[cali]

132. Sure.

First of all, ask yourself; what is Sheehan trying to say? In a nutshell, I'd say that she's trying to express that attacking Iran is a bad, bad idea. Furthermore, she want's to expose what she views as hypocrisy re Ahmadinejad and Iran. As I pointed out, she gets Middle Eastern politics all wrong. That's not just a minor quibble. She's running for Congress and she speaks out constantly on foreign affairs.

Secondly, Sheehan's overuse of adjectives detracts from her message: very boorishly? Please. Let me rewrite that sentence for her:

"The President of Columbia, Mr. Bollinger, refused to extend even the most basic courtesy to his invited guest. Seeing him attack President Ahmadinejad and call him names, before Mr. Ahmadinejad even had a chance to speak, was shameful".

See? Shorter, to the point, and a hell of a lot more persuasive. And that's what rhetoric is supposed to be; persuasive speech. All the endless name calling Cindy engages in, isn't effective. It's a turn off to all but those who adore her.

I'm not gonna do this paragraph by paragraph, though rewriting a Cindy missive could be fun, but here's why so much of what she says is irrelevant. And here's what I mean by irrelevant: Points that don't advance her argument. The stuff about the Reverend doesn't, or the tragic events in Jena, or Walmart, or China, or MoveOn- and it wasn't a censure. Big factual error. The comments about the prison system and Hugo Chavez are extraneous, not to mention the lip gloss toss in, and much, much more.

It's a terrible piece of rhetoric. The more I deconstruct it the greater, it's grievous flaws. I know quite a bit about rhetoric, and hers is almost a textbook case of how not to do it.

[peacetalksforall]

134. So you are the editor. No one cares. And I still don't know how she

gets all the ME wrong.

For sure - NO ONE cares how she writes at this point in time, especially on a fast moving day like today.

[cali]

136. Hysterical response.

Really too funny. And sorry, lots of people care, and all of this junk she's writing is going to come back to haunt her but good- that is if she actually runs, and I doubt that.

[renie408]

141. Question

How much really great rhetoric do you see out of congressional members? And an inability to string two words together intelligibly doesn't seem to have slowed GWB down.

I think you are probably right. CS won't get elected. But it isn't because of her lack of cohesive writing skills. It's because she is not an essentially political animal. She doesn't have a sense of what she should and shouldn't say. It has its charm, but I can see her shooting herself in the foot in an election. I think she gets too hung up in her hatred of Bush and his administration. It seems fine for people here to call his administration 'Bushco', etc., but 'unprofessional' for someone who intends to run for public office.

Your criticisms seem overly harsh to me. I didn't think that the entire post/blog entry/ essay lacked merit. Her observations about China were correct and to the point. The same behavior the WH accepts in them, it abhors in Ahmadinejad.

[cali]

144. Actually, there's quite a bit of fine rhetoric that comes

out of Congress- surprisingly. And she won't get elected because she says outrageous things like the dem party is the party of slavery, and the income tax is unconstitutional. BTW, I'm represented in the Senate by someone who is famously not a 'political animal'; Bernie Sanders. The expression of her hate is so over the top, that it's a huge turn off to people. And it's not just hatred of bush. Her hate of all dems but Dennis is just absud.

Of course she had some points. She just didn't make them well. And why even have anything about China other than their hr record?

[proud2BlibKansan]

155. So maybe you should contact her and offer your superior editing skills.

Since you seem to care so much about her writing skills.

[Whisp]

8. recommended! thanks, Cindy.

I can always rely on you telling it like it really is. Thanks so much.

[Dystopian]

9. Posted with permission.....K&R

May I ask....who you had to get permission from?
Thank you...


peace~

[proud2BlibKansan]

65. Some of us are on her email list

and she doesn't mind if we post her emails.

[Dystopian]

85. Thank you....I thought something else.....

Some of Cindy's writings have been locked or have disappeared. I've had that happen to me twice....They were her bulletin messages from myspace...(I got this one also) Because of the DU policy and Cindy, I thought we had to get permission from DU now to post her articles! I'm go glad that as usual, I assumed the worst. That's why I asked...thank you very much for clarifying.



peace~

[fenriswolf]

10. love it

cindy echos my own thoughs, clean up house first before we point the finger.

[sandnsea]

11. good points about China & Communism

All the corporatists care about is control of the masses while they exploit the resources. If Iran agreed to sell oil to the US at half price, they'd be our instant buddies.

[NotGivingUp]

12. Cindy knows how to tell it like it is...and she does it so well.

We've got a heck of a lot of cleanning to do.

[AuntPatsy]

13. Even if you don't like cindy, everyone should read this, excellent.

and she should be credited....

[unkachuck]

15. bless you, Cindy....

....you speak the truth....

"Let’s clean our own filthy house before we criticize someone else for theirs."

....how could any red-blooded patriot god-fearing American disagree with that statement?

....Go Cindy Go, and keep up the good work!!

[Swamp Rat]

16. k&r

[malaise]

17. Cindy you're the best

Let’s clean our own filthy house before we criticize someone else for theirs.

BINGO

[Name removed]

18. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[cali]

19. Sorry, nobody is above reasoned criticism

She's wrong on her take about the middle east. And I don't think it's an effective piece of rhetoric, except to the choir.

[LittleClarkie]

23. There's something about the words "all" and "everything"

I cringe each time I see those words of absolutism.

And once again, it's not Sheehan, and it's not Chavez for that matter, that bug me so much, as their supporters who will brook no criticism, even if civilly stated. People don't understand that I'm not a Chavez hater or a Cindy hater. I don't stand against these people or for them. I stand up for civil criticism.

[cali]

24. I'm not sure what you mean about 'all' or 'everything'

But yes, many of her supporters seem more like acolytes than anything else.

[LittleClarkie]

25. Here:

"Everything she said was spot on, the hell with all of her brainwashed critics"

It's from the post you were responding to. Everything she said was right, and all her critics are wrong. Really, all of them? Every last single one?

Pet peeve. Don't mind me.

[cali]

30. kick because I wish we could discuss this missive

Sheehan, and her use of language and activism without devolving into Cindy rocks, and Cindy sucks.

[truedelphi]

118. You nailed it! n/t

[peacetalksforall]

129. What is wrong with her language and activism. We kill people and

we are supposed to talk about it delicately?

[cali]

137. you. (and so many others)

don't seem to understand that she's not reaching anyone but her fans. Period. She's not expanding the peace movement. She's irrelevant to the larger debate.

[CreekDog]

46. sycophants

[NoPasaran]

20. "We here in America are living in a fascist state"

That allows crackpots like Cindy Sheehan to spout her half-baked, goggle-boxed nonsense. Oh, the horror!

[cali]

26. That's not reasoned criticism

You could have made the same point without the name calling.

[Freddie Stubbs]

31. If this were a fascist state, Sheehan would have disappeared long ago

[cali]

32. OK, but I'm more interested in what people

think of the rhetoric she employs.

[Freddie Stubbs]

34. Shrill, over the top, not very persuasive to those who don't already agree with her

[Le Taz Hot]

40. "Shrill"

there's that word again. Funny how it's almost always applied only to females.

[cali]

41. I don't like that word either

but I think her rhetoric is poor, and this is no exception. I've written more detailed explanations of why I think this, in other posts on this thread. That said, I wish people who are critical of her wouldn't empoy such language in their criticism. But I also wish that some of her supporters weren't so adoring of every word she says.

I posted a piece about Bread & Puppet (that will surely sink) Over the years, I think their activities have been more effective than anyone elses. Part of it, is the use of theatre and humor. They've been able to move people in a unique way.

[KharmaTrain]

138. How's "Bombastic" Fit??

I apply the term "shrill" to anyone who yells fire in a crowded movie house...calling Democrats enablers of slavery. To me that is shrill and it's not sexist...it may be considered racist, however.

I can think of far more sexist and offensive terms that have been thrown at Cindy than shrill.

[Usrename]

67. Why would fascists choose to martyr her?

More effective to ridicule her, no?

[Freddie Stubbs]

135. She would have simply 'resigned' from activism and never heard of again

[Zandor]

48. LOL!

How does poor Cindy manage to speak freely under this facist regime called America?

[proud2BlibKansan]

157. The same way the rest of us manage in this fascist regime

We elected a president and the Supreme Court appointed his opponent. He manufactured an enemy and invaded a country. He has intimidated Congress into giving him his war and stripping constitutional rights from Americans. They also allow him to torture our 'enemies'. Few are brave enough to speak out as Cindy does. She has been arrested numerous times in this fascist regime. And she lost her eldest son.

So none of us are really managing well, and some have been affected worse than others. Most of us are grateful to have Cindy's voice. All of us are fortunate that she speaks out while America goes shopping and watches American Idol.

[Tian Zhuangzhuang]

21. I don't know where to begin.

But claiming it is boorish behavior to criticize someone who supports the hanging of homosexuals (and blames homosexuality on "Western Values") seems an unusual strategy for winning a congressional seat in the San Francisco Bay Area.


The rest of it honestly reads like a parody of progressive hot buttons. If she had included Olive Garden and Breast feeding it would have been perfect lounge material.

America has a long history of righting wrongs when their own house is less than perfect (The Civil War and WW2 being two excellent examples.) It is to America's credit (current administration notwithstanding) that it does this.

And if I invite a cannibal for dinner I don't let him choose the menu.

[cali]

22. I think you hit the nail on the head

it really does read like a parody of progressive hot button issues, but there's also the problem of her complete misunderstanding of the Middle East.

As for her run for Congress, she doesn't stand a chance.

[CreekDog]

49. I wish I could recommend your post!

Refraining from criticism of non-American leaders would stop us from taking good positions on anything.

By this standard, we could not criticize Sudan for Darfur, Israel for anything related to Palestinians, shouldn't have criticized South Africa for apartheid, or finally, Hitler back in WW2.

Cindy is simply foolish and stupid.

[peacetalksforall]

130. If they came at the invitation of a University and the U.N. -they

should be treated with decency while they are here.

[provis99]

27. She just gets more incoherent and bizarre every day

Her writings remind me of the imfamous ramblings of the Unabomber in the New York Times.

[AuntPatsy]

33. You obviously did not take the time to read it, that's sad, it was very well stated.

[cali]

38. I did. I read it carefully,

noted her lack of knowledge about the Middle East , and poor use of rhetoric, as well as her rambling style with its inclusion of points that don't add to her arguments, and decided it was a poor piece of rhetoric indeed.

[AuntPatsy]

39. I don't agree, I think she did a good job.

[cali]

42. The trouble is, it won't be considered by any but her

supporters. It won't make anyone reconsider or raise questions.

[AuntPatsy]

44. Again I don't agree, I admit to finding everything Cindy does is not always

the way I would do things but when someone makes a good call they should be acknowledged for such in the same way they are acknowledged when they make mistakes.

I don't always agree with how Cindy handles certain situations but that doesn't mean that I ignore her on a consistent basis because she has done many courages things in her life, she really helped to get the anti war theme exposure, I don't agree with others that she destroyed the message, the msm did their very best to malign her character and her actions because she was seen as a threat to our present day leadership...

I won't fall for that campaign and look at each step accordingly.

[proud2BlibKansan]

158. Sure sounds like you are considering it

You have monopolized this thread with your considerations of her piece.

[CreekDog]

50. Her standard would prevent us from taking stands on most international issues

I think if she thought about her position for 10 minutes, it would actually change.

And she will be criticizing foreign leaders before the USA cleans up its own act, just wait.

[GOPBasher]

95. I hope you're right.

I would like to ask her one thing: "If you consider yourself a liberal, why do you think it's 'bad manners' to criticize a theocratic, fascist dictator who persecutes homosexuals, women and followers of any religion other than shia Islam?"

Perhaps she would change her mind after that.

[trekbiker]

122. what are you, an english prof???

we have an out of control administration doing all it can to engineer another disastrous war and your worried about rhetoric??? un-fucking-believable

Cindy states her position in a forceful and somewhat emotional way that speaks to the gut level. Seems to have been a pretty effective technique for the other side come to think of it, only they are lying out their asses. Progressives and thier "rhetoric" keep getting steam-rolled in the meantime

[northzax]

149. a simple question

if we have to 'clean up our own filthy house before pointing fingers' what should we consider doing about Darfur?

[peacetalksforall]

131. Who the hell cares about how she writes? . The only thing relevant in the above criticism

is your case you are making about her being wrong about the ME. With enough repetition of the accusation we might believe you someday.

[cali]

139. Here's an astounding idea for you: Do your own research

on why Ahmadinejad was elected. Do your own research on the other points I raised. Wow. what a thought; actually learning something.

[peacetalksforall]

143. That was an ugly insult.

[cali]

146. No. richly deserved snark n/t

[proud2BlibKansan]

159. In other words, you don't know

Apparently you are a writing expert but but can't present an argument against the content.

[onenote]

28. cindy cindy cindy

why is it that cindy..and for that matter, a fair number of folks here at DU...can't swallow the idea of someone criticizing anyone if they don't also, and indeed more vigorously...criticize chimpy. I can't stand chimpy, have worked against him since the day is elected and will cheer as loudly as anyone the day he leaves, whether its January 2009 or earlier. But that doesn't mean that I can't indpendently think that Ahmadinejad is indeed a petty dictator and a threat to human rights. And I can hold that thought without having to bring in my dislike for chimpy and make some sort of comparison.

As for Cindy criticizing someone for boorish behavior..well, some things are best left unsaid around here these days.

[liberalsoldier5]

76. Very well stated.

I hate Ahmadinejad more than Bush. There I said it. You'd think that DU has lost its mind sometimes. Don't worry though- we're definitely in the majority of our party.

[CreekDog]

94. There are a lot of people at DU in full agreement with you

Don't feel so outnumbered.

There must be something in human nature that makes the people who have the least reason to be confident in their opinions the most likely to state them boldly and confidently. Thus, the plethora of ridiculous posts.

[GOPBasher]

82. Exactly! n/t

[proud2BlibKansan]

29. You rock, Cindy!

:hug:

[Dorian Gray]

36. It's an interesting article....

but something that struck me as funny: Her asking, "Secondly, what about our President who appears to be a “petty and cruel dictator?”

And my answer.... George Bush has not been asked to speak at Columbia. I'm sure if he did, he'd be much derided by the population, though I don't know if the actual college president would make the statement about him.

She goes on about the demonization of Hugo Chavez, which is an interesting position to take in an article about Ahmajinejad. It sort of supports the ties between the two leaders. A tie which Chavez should want to dissolve if American reaction to Ahmajinejad is at all reflective of world opinion (after his speech).

It's an interesting take, though it does feel as though she's falling into the "trap" of defending Ahmajinejad because she disdains Bush so much. It's not an either/or. You can condemn both at the same time.

[Le Taz Hot]

37. Excellent response, Cindy.

"Let's clean our own filthy house before we criticize someone else for theirs."

Can I get an Amen, brothers, and sisters!

[CreekDog]

55. So you won't criticize what's going on in Darfur?

You think it would be rude to take a position on that? After all, our house is not clean yet, so we can't say ANYTHING bad about another country until then --by your standard.

People are simply getting stupider.

[Le Taz Hot]

59. Non-sequiter.

I won't engage. Its that whole pig/sing thing. You understand.

[onenote]

62. If you won't exchange, then I guess we'll never know why its a non-sequitur

Sure doesn't look like one to me.

[distantearlywarning]

107. He had to come up with something to explain his faulty train of logic

Something that made it seem like his failure to apply the same standard across the board was somehow your fault.

Don't worry. Some of us got what you meant, and he did too, even though he tried to pretend like he didn't.

[Le Taz Hot]

119. Well, first of all, the last I checked, I had

no hangy downy thing in the nether regions so lets at least get the gender right. The reason I choose not to engage is that you guys are hell-bent on demonizing Cindy and there's nothing I nor anyone else could possibly say that would change your mind -- hence the pig/sing reference. So I'd say you're pretty much batting 100 on the negative side there, Sparky, but you keep on tryin'. Y'hear?

[Yukari Yakumo]

109. or Myanmar/Burma? {nt}

uguu

[CreekDog]

43. No she didn't!

But she always does.

Apparently it's rude to criticize the President of Iran, but not rude to go after Pelosi and Bush.

Go figure.

[Zandor]

47. Lying in bed with Ahmadinejad

That's one more reason Sheehan is irrelevant.

[cali]

53. I think there's plenty to criticize there but where

do you see support for Ahmadinejad?

[Zandor]

60. She objected

to how Ahmadinejad was treated and then tried to deflect criticism of him by pointing to other wrongdoings.

Why not just rebuke him thoroughly?

[LSK]

75. grow up

[rockymountaindem]

51. Who's we?

Why don't individual Americans, such as the Columbia U. president, have the grounds to criticize leaders/practices of other countries of whom/which we disapprove? George Bush should not define us. We as individuals and members of the liberal movement in the United States don't want anything to do with him either. This is a democracy, and he doesn't speak for us. We didn't vote for him, and we don't give him our approval.

People who love Bush but hate France/Iran/China whatever are the ones with the credibility issues, not us. We can credibly be opposed to all these things regardless of the fact that Bush is our "leader". If you accept the argument that individual Americans have no grounds to criticize the actions of other countries simply because George Bush is our President, that's the same as saying that Soviet dissidents had no moral authority because their country was led by Brezhnev. That doesn't make any sense, and neither does saying that we as individuals and members of the liberal movement don't have the moral authority to criticize backwards fools like Ahmadinejad. If anything, I would say that round criticism of far-right conservatism in all its forms adds to our credibility.

George Bush only speaks for you if you let him.

[Usrename]

68. A whole lot of folks here want to hold Cindy to a very high standard.

A lot of people here want to hold her to a much different standard than they would hold the president of Columbia U.

You'd think a guy in his position would be held to the higher standard, especially since Cindy makes no claims to speak for academia.

But that's not the case with a lot of posters here.

[cali]

70. As you can see I've posted criticism of Cindy

in this thread. I'm not going to repeat it; you can read that criticism if you so wish. I also posted an OP last night entitled "Why Bollinger was wrong". I hold him to a high standard.
Sheehand has put herself front and center and claims to speak for not only the anti-war movement but the larger public. I hold her to a high standard as well. And if you're going to write stuff for a public audience, you should expect criticism.

[Ganja Ninja]

52. Amen.

:kick:

[CreekDog]

57. Everyone who agrees with Cindy's position I challenge you...

...to live up to her rhetoric and NOT CRITICIZE anything that happens outside the USA until this country fixes all its problems.

If you want to criticize Israel, it has to wait. If you want to criticize Sudan, that also must wait. If you want to criticize whaling by other countries, please be quiet.

After all, your position is a moral stance and it would be hypocrisy to post ever again about the wrongs of another country in light of your support of Cindy's position that we not criticize someone else's "filthy house: until we clean up our own.

We will be watching if you guys can walk Cindy's talk. I doubt it.

[Usrename]

80. I don't think she says that.

She does say that it wouldn't be right for a foreign country to invite our president there to speak and then hurl insults at him during his introduction. But where does she say not to criticize anything that happens outside the USA? I don't read it the same way.

[CreekDog]

91. She does say it, "Let’s clean our own filthy house before we criticize someone else for theirs."

She does not limit her criticism to the specific case of a university invitation to speak, but also criticizes a news interview by Scott Pelley which cites/asks about Iranian issues without citing corresponding problems in/with America.

She is being totally ridiculous.

She could have made the point that we should clean up on our own messes, but it was the latter point that we should (university president or journalist, or anybody using the 'plural' we) not criticize foreign leaders.

[Usrename]

93. I think she means that in more metaphorical, not literal, sense.

Mathew 7:5

"You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother's eye."

[CreekDog]

100. Yes, but her sloppiness in reasoning makes it appear

that one shouldn't criticize foreign dictators or put them on the spot.

If that was not what she intended to do, she should have written a different letter.

But Cindy makes outlandish statements all the time, I don't feel the need to read the most favorable interpretation into these statements --if we can't take her words at face value then there's no point in listening to her.

[Usrename]

112. I honestly don't think that is a fair reading at all.

Clean our own house is clearly not meant to be literal. Unless you really believe she is some sort of neat freak.

I was only trying to respond to your original question because I thought I had a somewhat different interpretation of what she was saying (and I guess I am one of the folks who agrees with her).

[CreekDog]

123. Proper writing on her part could've made it very clear

But instead she singles out by name those who criticize, Bollinger as University dean and Pelley, as a journalist for being hypocritical, rude, boorish or whatever.

Heck, I could have written (which would have been clearer):

==========
Aren't we all hypocrites for castigating the Iranian President for his record on human rights while we at home have a government that does not have an exemplary record. What kind of example are we? Are we better? Certainly. But, are we good enough to not give our enemies any room to hold our human rights record against us? No, but we should be. Therefore, when we tell someone to clean up their home, we better be making sure that ours is as clean as we can make it, otherwise we are hypocrites.
===========

If Cindy said that in her missive, she would not be castigated here, but she said something else, something sloppily written and ill-considered and something that seemed to argue against criticizing a foreign dictator. You have to argue outside the text to say her intent was something different, if you take her at face value, you wind up with my interpretation. That being the case, if her intent was as you said, that is poor writing when a reasonable person can come away with an entirely different point from the same words.

[Yukari Yakumo]

103. Does this include Iraq's Parliament? {nt}

uguu

[CreekDog]

124. Ah yes, Cindy criticized the Iraqi parliament

Directly contradicting her statements posted here which say she should withhold criticizing other countries until our house is clean.

Consistently is surprisingly, not Cindy's strong point.

[Major Hogwash]

61. Bush started a war in Iraq - that has killed 3800 Americans - and some people argue with Cindy?

That is beyond comprehension!

Get a fuckin' clue, people!

[cali]

63. I think you're the one to get a clue

This isn't about the fact that she's against the war, so are many people. Yes, her tragedy and her actions a few years ago served to bring attention positively to the anti-war movement. That does not make every word she utters or pens above criticism.

I think she does a terrible job of crafting an anti-war message. I suppose you could argue that her rhetoric serves to rally her cadre of supporters, but it does zilch to reach out to anyone else.

Not only that, but her rhetoric is weak, she's often short on facts and knowledge, and her writing is bizarrely tangential.

You want to classify me as a traitor to peace or a wingnut or whatever because I don't subscribe to adulation of Sheehan, feel free.

[Major Hogwash]

113. I only made one comment in this thread, cali.

Yet, you've made several comments here in just this one thread bashing Cindy.
Cindy is not your enemy.
So, maybe you should re-examine your priorities.

The Iraq War has claimed many more victims than just the 3800 soldiers killed in the Iraq War.

For every soldier killed, there are 9 other people affected by their deaths - family members, co-workers, and friends.
That means the war has severely affected the lives of more than 34,200 people that knew those 3800 soldiers that were killed.

Also, there have been over 25,000 wounded soldiers from the Iraq War.
They also affect 9 other people.
That means the wounds those 25,000 soldiers suffered have affected 225,000 other people.

3800 + 34,200 + 25,000 + 225,000 = 288,000

Any criticism of the illegal, immoral Iraq war is fine with me - from anybody.

When does it stop?

[AuntPatsy]

114. that was a nice post.l

[CreekDog]

125. Cindy's criticism of the Iraq war doesn't make other statements any more correct

[Major Hogwash]

152. I think Cindy's article is accurate, just as accurate as anything Bush has ever uttered.

And since she is an American, I will defend her right to say what she wants to say.

That's why I signed up to serve my country to begin with when I was just a kid back when I was only 18 years old - to support the American way. To make sure we preserve our freedoms, especially the right to dissent, the right to free expression, freedom of speech.

I wasn't drafted because the draft had ended in 1972.
I volunteered to join the Army clear back in 1975.
I was RA, man. Regular Army.

Cindy Sheehan is not a warmonger - George Bush is.

We can't afford to lose sight of that.

Cindy didn't start the Iraq War, George Bush did.

[proud2BlibKansan]

160. Well said

Thank you.

[conscious evolution]

87. Amazing isn't it?

It used to really piss me off when people attacked her.
Now I just sit back and laugh at them.

[Individualist]

64. K&R

Thanks for posting this.

[Hydra]

66. Cindy is getting better at this

I wish she had better people advising her...she could really go places with our message if she was able to suppress her urge to say what she feels at times and puts it more eloquently.

Still, it's been her message of outrage that has gotten her to the point that people listen to her, so I probably shouldn't second guess.

[slackmaster]

69. If everyone abided by that last sentence, nobody would ever criticize anyone

Nobody's right if everybody's wrong, as the song says.

[Nutmegger]

71. Oh yes, YES Cindy!

R and K!

[liberalsoldier5]

72. Wow. I've never been happier that she's left our party.

To think that this "attention whore" (as she's been dubbed) is running for Congress is fucking hysterical. She's kooked herself out of reasonable debate. Most only listen to her for humor's sake.

[LSK]

74. what the hell are you talking about? state anything she said that is untrue

What is kook in there? Nice freeper word you are using there.

[liberalsoldier5]

77. I guess Jon Stewart is a freeper too...

for thinking Cindy Sheehan is insanely ridiculous. And most of our party and liberals in general must be freepers too. Face it: SHE'S LOST HER MIND. And I have no problem applying the same label to Cindy Sheehan's supporters as I do her. I'm afraid you're in a very silly minority. That's all.

[LSK]

78. WHY? STATE REASONS

I HAVE YET TO HEAR ONE!!!

[liberalsoldier5]

79. Then you live under a rock.

Read her own words in all her screeches. They're available online. If you still agree with her and still demand proof that Cindy "I no longer love America" Sheehan's lost it, then I'm afraid arguing with you is truly hopeless.

[LSK]

83. and once again you FAIL TO PROPERLY DEBATE THE OP

WELL DONE!!!

Do you want to try one more time to actually refute anything she wrote in this column?????

Or will you continue to debate like a 4 year old?

[babylonsister]

102. Welcome to DU? Why are you hiding your profile? And why are you

quoting everyone else? Do you have a tough time thinking for yourself?
You are offensive. Try amusing us with a positive post of your own, about anything, instead of slamming people and parroting others.

[proud2BlibKansan]

161. You keep mentioning "OUR party"

Yet I sense that you and I have never been in the same party. The party I belong to is opposed to this war, as Cindy is. The party I belong to is repulsed by the war mongering bush administration, as Cindy is. We also know that the only "silly minority" is the minority that still approves of this pResident and his war.

[cali]

84. I'm not the poster you're querying but here's something that's not

true, from my post #7 in this thread:

She's running for Congress; she should know the primary reason Ahmadinejad was elected was economic concern, not the U.S. invasion. And furthermore, many reactionary governments have not been elected in the region, and even the election of Hamas had far more to do with the corruption of Fatah than anything else. Time for foreign affairs 101 for Cindy.

[cali]

86. That's just offensive

name calling, not an argument, and as you can see I'm quite critical of her.

[LSK]

73. K&R, took the words right out of my mouth

[GOPBasher]

81. Ahmadinejad is a holocaust-denying, theocratic fascist who is against

EVERY SINGLE thing we "liberals" are for. We're for freedom of religion; he's for theocracy. We're for equal rights for homosexuals; he claims "we don't have homosexuals in our country." We're for democracy; he's for fictional democracy where Ayatollas really determine what happens. Just because he happens to oppose the thecratic fascists running our country does NOT mean we're supposed to like him.

I hate every fascist -- both Bush and Ahmadinejad included. And I'm glad Ahmadinejad was publicly scolded for his hideous predjudices.

[CreekDog]

92. I totally agree with you

And am dumbfounded by the support Sheehan has for her ridiculous statements. Statements that seem to suggest that it's bad manners to criticize a dictator, as if bad manners were ever a consideration for Cindy.

To those that support Cindy's activism and positions, I can understand that you do this, but there is no need to support her stances when they are ridiculous and this one is totally ridiculous.

[Yukari Yakumo]

106. And don't forget these gems...

Bill Maher said it beat a couple of weeks ago, activism has been replaced by narcissism. I think everything Cindy does now is for the spotlight.

[distantearlywarning]

108. Recommended. n/t

[tammywammy]

117. Good Post! n/t

[spoony]

156. Yes, but opposing fascists means we...support fascists...or some stupid thing

Or perhaps it's that we must temporarily favour one fascist over another, or only criticise one at a time, frankly I don't even begin to understand the mindset that we should condone/tolerate/shut up about Ahamadinejad lest DU nuke Iran.

You put it better than I could at any rate.

[McCamy Taylor]

89. God bless you, Cindy

[Joanne98]

97. God Bless Cindy! She's hit's the nail on the head again! K&R!

[Desertrose]

104. I was thinking almost the same thing...but Cindy said it better.

We have some nerve calling the kettle black when we have our own little dictator.


Go Cindy!


DR

[L0oniX]

105. The President of Columbia University is an acknowledgeable dolt

It is a shame on him that he doesn't know that Iran is run by the Ayatollahs ...not Ahmadinejad. Ahmadinejad is only a powerless talking head and not a dictator. Not only do we execute convicted criminals but we pay about $4,000,000 for each one executed in Florida. It was not too long ago that execution was performed by hanging so how crude is that? He is also correct when he points out that America will not put themselves in the position of the Palestinians so as to be able to understand the situation. America is blindly supporting Israel irregardless of where that takes us. Support of Israel has only caused us many problems and we have given them enough money over the last 60 some years. Who the hell came up with the Marshall plan so as to steal a country and give it to others? Why didn't they take some of Germany and give it to them? Enough is enough. Say we only help them if they are attacked. That should be enough help.

[sistagoldilocks42]

121. Take the wise counsel of the elders

Cindy is spot on and we all know it. Accepting it and taking the required action to correct
and defeat fascism, racism, imperialism...all the ism's is the next move. Let the true young warriors of
this generation go forth and bring true justice and peace globally. I looked at the senate on c-span this afternoon and realized then as the day I left for exile from the USA, that they are criminal and treasonous to the USA constitution and people. Face it my fellow citizens because it does not look
pretty from where I am. We need to "Chase these crazy bald heads outa Town". The Monks are showing you the way to peacefully expose these criminals by taking to the streets and staying there. They cannot kill them all and neither can they. I have a hard job and that is letting the natives know
that all the people in the USA are not drugged legally nor illegally and have not fallen for the German syndrome. True African Liberation must happen. America will pay to repair the breech for war crimes and crimes against the peace, the war pictures are awful and disgraceful for any advanced civilization.....the govt will have to financially repatriate all nations for their crimes from Mama Africa to Mama Africa....So what is Africom again??????? The Africans are awake because they have been robbed, kidnapped into slavery, miseducated and now enslaved in the prison industrial complexes, The Indigenous
brown Americans that have been the subject of genocide...yes genocide....See now we need to "Teach the youth the truth, because we cannot water down and dilute, we can't hide the truth from the youth.

Live live and love Rastafari because he was the personification of perfection. Ask yourself how Hitler and his brothers behaved and still behave today ala BushCo...Mama Nature and Father Time

I stared Hurricane Dean in the face
Love and Light to all

[defendandprotect]

140. Agree, Cindy: "Our President is a petty and cruel dictator" -- !!!!

[ruggerson]

145. Fuck you Cindy Sheehan

fuck you. You are a vile creature. You cry about your dead son, but deliberately ignore the gay teenagers HUNG AND STONED TO DEATH by Iranians. What about THEIR mothers?

You are an anti semitic, homophobic piece of garbage.

Fuck you.

[cali]

147. that's just crazy talk, and offensive as hell. n/t

[ruggerson]

148. Frankly, I could give a shit

I've had it with people making excuses for this monster. And I've had it with people ignoring what this regime does to women and gays. This woman can fuck off. Sorry if you find it offensive.

[dailykoff]

150. Summary: people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

Especially at their invited guests, especially when they're running full-bore death squad operations in said guest's region.

[peacetalksforall]

151. Thank you Cindy. We appreciate your bluntness.

We are in dire times and we need dire messages to fight the loss of blood, money, honesty, and our country - we need to make the claims to get it back. Your bluntness works.

You have enemies here on DU. Let them burn their energy going after you - just keep fighting for justice and action from our leaders.

[LittleClarkie]

153. She has critics here on DU

There is a difference.

And a few outright enemies, I will grant you.

[peacetalksforall]

154. Yes, critics and enemies. I'll just call the critics for now. Thanks.