I'm sure you defend Cindy Sheehan just the same, don't you?
Posted By: Zauber on 2005-09-27
In Reply to: You speak to an Army mom this way. Says a lot about you. nm - sm
Not a bet I'd take.
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
Cindy Sheehan
Did you see where Cindy Sheehan, who lost her son in 2004 in Iraq, is camping out in front of Bush's ranch and she has gotten interviews with CBS, ABC, NBC, CNN. She states she wants to talk to Bush but he send two of his aides outside to tell her he won't meet with her. Why not, I wonder. He is our president, we elected him to office, he is our servant. I think he owes her a meeting. She gave the ultimate sacrifice, her son. He can't sacrifice a half hour to one hour of his FIVE WEEK vacation? Vacation, what is that? Do you think Clinton or Bush, Sr or even Reagan would have met with her. I think each of them would have.
Can you say Cindy Sheehan?
It just doesn't add up. Pat didn't have to go, so why would he have gone for a illegal war? I think Mrs. Tilman is another grieving mother expressing her grief in a not-so-honoring way to her son. I've not walked that road of grief, so I'll save my judgements of Mrs. Tilman beyond that...
Cindy Sheehan
Nominate her for pest of the year. She's making a mockery out of what her son believed in. She's a sorry excuse for a mother.
More on Cindy Sheehan...
Again...as with most protestors...it is not about the cause, it is about the protestor. This woman should be ashamed of herself.
Back then (forever ago, it seems), you could turn on any of the major networks – CBS (Cindy Broadcasting System), NBC (National Broadcast of Cindy), ABC (All ‘Bout Cindy), or even 24-hour coverage on CNN (Cindy News Network) – to hear her sad tale of woe about how she was fighting a one-woman battle against the imperial presidency in honor of her fallen son – deliberately killed by the neo-conservative cabal of Dick Cheney, Don Rumsfeld and Halliburton while he was serving in Iraq – by courageously confronting the forces of evil by camping out on the front lawn of the President Bush’s Crawford, Texas ranch.
What heroism. What bravery.
One prop used by Cindy Sheehan at “Camp Casey” (named in honor of her fallen son, Casey Sheehan) was a fake cemetery filled with 2,000 crosses representing all of those American military service members killed in the line of duty up to that time in the Global War on Terrorism. One of those crosses bore the name of Casey Sheehan, who was killed in action on April 4, 2004. There’s even video of her tending to his fake grave surrounded by representatives of the mainstream media. (It should be noted that at least one Gold Star family didn’t appreciate their son’s death being part of Sheehan’s “Camp Casey” media circus. Gary Qualls of Temple, Texas drove to the location and removed the prop wooden cross bearing his son’s name from Sheehan’s faux cemetery, saying, “I don’t believe in some of the things happening here. I find it disrespectful.”)
But at Casey Sheehan’s real grave in Vacaville-Elmira Cemetery in Vacaville, California, the Peace Mom couldn’t bother with having a headstone or even a wooden cross to mark his passing. Until recently, that is, when critics began to take notice of Casey Sheehan’s lonely unmarked grave.
Heaven knows she should have been aware of this grave oversight. In the January 2006 issue of Vanity Fair, Cindy Sheehan was featured in a macabre two-page pictoral spread of her posing on Casey’s grave. In a pathetic twist of irony, she was being honored by the magazine for the “Best Stand of 2005”.
From the Vanity Fair spread, it seems that her son’s real grave was as much of a prop as his fake grave. It wasn’t until Cindy Sheehan began receiving severe criticisms about the absence of any marker at Casey’s grave that the “Peace Mom” began to respond.
The first indication that she was starting to feel the heat from critics noting her traveling cemetary while her son’s grave went unmarked was seen in a blog entry she posted dated April 11th at Truthout.org (the left-wing website that on May 13th announced that Karl Rove was about to be indicted not long before the special prosecutor announced that he wasn’t subject to prosecution), where she offers a rambling explanation for why her son – dead for more than two years – had no tombstone. Of course, it is four paragraphs before she gets around to answering the question about the absence of a tombstone at Casey’s grave:
We had a Casualty Officer who abandoned us when our mortuary refused to pay the cemetery and told us that the government sent the money to the mortuary, so now it is your problem. You may have to sue the mortuary. Our government discards and dishonors its own.
So you see, it was George Bush, Dick Cheney and Karl Rove who were to blame for Casey Sheehan’s unadorned grave. But she later gives a more reasonable explanation – her mental instability:
For the first year after Casey was killed, I didn't want to believe it. I didn't want to place a TOMBstone on my son's grave. I didn't want one more marble proof that my son was dead. I couldn't even call where he was buried a cemetery, I had to call it Casey's Park. I placed fresh flowers in the cup every week and journaled there almost on a daily basis, and often laid on it and fell asleep and dreamed of my needlessly killed son. Have any of these people who claim that I am pissing on my son's grave even visited him?
In attacking her critics, she misses the very point she raises herself – if any of us had wanted to visit her son’s grave, how would we be able to find it without some kind of marker?
A quick examination of her explanation for this grave oversight raises glaring contradictions with known facts. Her first excuse is to blame the government. Let’s weigh her story with what we know to be true.
Had the Sheehan family chosen to have Casey buried in a National Cemetery (and his combat-related death would have made him eligible for a spot in Arlington National Cemetery), virtually all expenses would have been covered by the military. They didn’t choose that option. Instead, they had him buried in a private cemetery in his hometown – a perfectly legitimate option. In that instance (a private internment), the Department of Defense reimburses actual burial expenses up to $7,700. In addition to that, the actual expense of transporting his remains back to California would also be reimbursed by the government.
However, it wasn’t just the government in on this conspiracy, according to Sheehan; it was also the mortuary's fault for failing to pay the cemetery. It was only a few days after Sheehan publicly accused that owner of the mortuary that handled Casey funeral that he came forward to correct her story, as recorded in the Vacaville Reporter:
Steve Nadeau, the mortuary's owner, said Monday that not only did he properly pay the cemetery, but that he subsidized the process with his own money…
In an e-mail sent to The Reporter Sunday, Nadeau expressed hurt and disbelief at Sheehan's comments. He said that the amount of money the military gave the mortuary for Casey's funeral service and cemetery arrangements didn't even come close to covering the costs.
Several kind citizens made donations, said Nadeau. I absorbed the rest.
This was not the only way in which he went above and beyond his responsibilities following Casey's death, said Nadeau. He also provided a stretch limousine and a driver at his expense, he said, and invited the family to go to the airport with him so that he could accompany them. None of this was required, said Nadeau.
Having known the Sheehan family for many years through St. Mary's Catholic Church where Ms. Sheehan had previously been the youth director, it was my desire to provide care and dignity to Casey and the family. I did this in every respect.
Nadeau also refuted Sheehan's statement that the mortuary finally paid the cemetery only after the family threatened to bring the story to the media.
This never happened, said Nadeau. I would stop by the family home as I do most families' homes and check with them on necessary needs, etc.
Nadeau said the military provided his mortuary $5,736 in funding to pay for the funeral service and cemetery arrangements. The funding came in May 2004, said Nadeau, and he paid the cemetery as soon as the costs had been totaled and the donations received.
Now this testimony is very damning for Cindy Sheehan. According to the funeral director, the government came through with funding within a month of Casey’s death, and the cemetery was paid immediately. Anyone who has ever had to deal with getting money from the federal government knows this is lightning speed.
Admittedly, the funeral director’s story is not above questioning. Since Casey’s remains would have been embalmed, dressed and laid out at the Charles C. Carson Center for Mortuary Affairs at Dover Air Force Base even before they were sent to California, and the Defense Department would have covered transportation costs for his remains to be returned to his family, one wonders exactly what the $5,736 was actually paying for? Then again, the “death care” industry is known for its extraordinary product and service markups.
But what about Casey’s tombstone? This is where Cindy Sheehan’s excuses start to fall apart entirely.
In fact, the Department of Veterans Affairs provides virtually all veterans free headstones and grave markers at no cost to the family. From personal experience, I know that it only takes 2-3 months once the VA Form 40-1330 is submitted for these to be delivered directly to the cemetery. In most cases, private cemeteries will lay a base and install the veteran’s headstone or marker at no charge.
Perhaps “Peace Mom” was too busy with her anti-war activism to bother filling out the one page form?
Finally in May, Casey Sheehan’s grave finally received its headstone. In another article by the Vacaville Reporter (May 27th), Cindy Sheehan was quoted as saying that she had to pay for it out of her own pocket.
Sheehan said she had paid for the tombstone herself and was part of a family effort to put it up, even though its installation saddened her.
It is important for the rest of Casey's family to have one, she wrote Friday. I guess the pain of seeing it etched in marble that he is dead is another pain I will have to deal with.
…The headstone was very expensive, Sheehan wrote. She said that the government should have paid for it because of its responsibility for his death. But Sheehan said money is not the main issue.
Surely we should feel some pity for poor Cindy Sheehan for having to fork out the money for her son’s tombstone, even though he died in combat in service to his country? Well, again, this is where Sheehan’s story doesn’t fit the facts.
What she apparently forgot to tell the world in her bitter defense of her son’s unmarked grave was that the funeral reimbursement from the Defense Department wasn’t the only money she received from the government for Casey’s death. At least one former military official noted last month before Casey’s tombstone was installed that Sheehan was the beneficiary of a $250,000 Servicemembers’ Group Life Insurance (SGLI) policy. And legal documents filed in the divorce case of Patrick and Cindy Sheehan show that there was another Prudential Life Insurance policy (no. 43520001432577) paid at the time of his decease.
What has not been discussed (and Sheehan would be likely never to admit to) is that in addition to having actual funeral expenses reimbursed by the Defense Department and the SGLI and Prudential life insurance policies, Sheehan also received a $100,000 death gratuity from the government to cover miscellaneous expenses not covered by the DoD reimbursement. The $100,000 death gratuity is paid to all deaths in the line of duty retroactive to October 7, 2001, the beginning of post-9/11 military operations in Afghanistan.
While the description of Casey’s headstone described by the Vacaville Reporter sounds as if it is a fitting marker for a fallen hero killed in the defense of his country and that also reflects his personal interests, clearly the cost of it isn’t near the $100,000 Cindy Sheehan received from taxpayers to cover such expenses.
Now people might be led to think that the Feds get a big chunk of that money back in taxes. Cindy Sheehan even said last August at a Veterans for Peace rally that she was going to refuse to pay her 2004 taxes:
Another thing that I'm doing is - - my son was killed in 2004, so I'm not paying my taxes for 2004. If I get a letter from the IRS, I'm gonna say, you know what, this war is illegal; this is why this war is illegal. This war is immoral; this is why this war is immoral. You killed my son for this. I don't owe you anything. And if I live to be a million, I won't owe you a penny.
And I want them to come after me, because unlike what you've been doing with the war resistance, I want to put this frickin' war on trial. And I want to say, You give me my son, and I'll pay your taxes.
What she forgot to mention in her tirade is that the $350,000 paid to her by the government ($250,000 SGLI insurance policy and the $100,000 death gratuity) is entirely tax free.
But if Cindy Sheehan is correct that she had to pay for the monument out of her own pocket (even though she admitted to the Vacaville Reporter that her estranged husband, Patrick, handles all matters relating to Casey’s grave site, a fact confirmed by Steve Nadeau, the funeral director that handled Casey’s arrangements), the question has to be asked:
What happened to the hundreds of thousands of tax free dollars that Cindy Sheehan received from the U.S. Government for her son’s death?
One has only had to follow Sheehan’s anti-war activism over the past year to reasonably conclude that the money paid to Cindy Sheehan has been going to finance her globetrotting activist lifestyle. Yes, while Casey Sheehan’s grave went unmarked, his mother was spending the money given to her to pay for his funeral expenses having tea parties with Third-World tinpot dictators, like her BFF, Comrade Hugo Chavez.
From all accounts, Casey Sheehan was the kind of guy that you would enjoy knowing. His commitment to his country and the Global War on Terror that it is prosecuting was seen in the heroic actions that led to his death in Sadr City and in his voluntary reenlistment in 2004 knowing he would probably be sent back to Iraq. His death, like the deaths of all members of the military who die in service to their country, was tragic and a loss to all Americans.
But perhaps even more tragic is how Casey Sheehan’s mother has taken to politically trafficking in her son’s death advancing a cause that many close to him have said he would never have agreed with. His mother’s lack of concern about caring for and appropriately honoring her son’s remains while using her son’s unmarked grave as a photo prop for Vanity Fair and also erecting fake grave markers at her media events should tell us all we need to know about Cindy Sheehan.
With no thanks apparently due to her, Casey Sheehan’s grave has the marker he deserves.
The Swift Boating of Cindy Sheehan
Op-Ed Columnist
The Swift Boating of Cindy Sheehan
By FRANK RICH
Published: August 21, 2005
CINDY SHEEHAN couldn't have picked a more apt date to begin the vigil that ambushed a president: Aug. 6 was the fourth anniversary of that fateful 2001 Crawford vacation day when George W. Bush responded to an intelligence briefing titled "Bin Laden Determined to Attack Inside the United States" by going fishing. On this Aug. 6 the president was no less determined to shrug off bad news. Though 14 marine reservists had been killed days earlier by a roadside bomb in Haditha, his national radio address that morning made no mention of Iraq. Once again Mr. Bush was in his bubble, ensuring that he wouldn't see Ms. Sheehan coming. So it goes with a president who hasn't foreseen any of the setbacks in the war he fabricated against an enemy who did not attack inside the United States in 2001.
When these setbacks happen in Iraq itself, the administration punts. But when they happen at home, there's a game plan. Once Ms. Sheehan could no longer be ignored, the Swift Boating began. Character assassination is the Karl Rove tactic of choice, eagerly mimicked by his media surrogates, whenever the White House is confronted by a critic who challenges it on matters of war. The Swift Boating is especially vicious if the critic has more battle scars than a president who connived to serve stateside and a vice president who had "other priorities" during Vietnam.
The most prominent smear victims have been Bush political opponents with heroic Vietnam résumés: John McCain, Max Cleland, John Kerry. But the list of past targets stretches from the former counterterrorism czar Richard Clarke to Specialist Thomas Wilson, the grunt who publicly challenged Donald Rumsfeld about inadequately armored vehicles last December. The assault on the whistle-blower Joseph Wilson - the diplomat described by the first President Bush as "courageous" and "a true American hero" for confronting Saddam to save American hostages in 1991 - was so toxic it may yet send its perpetrators to jail.
True to form, the attack on Cindy Sheehan surfaced early on Fox News, where she was immediately labeled a "crackpot" by Fred Barnes. The right-wing blogosphere quickly spread tales of her divorce, her angry Republican in-laws, her supposed political flip-flops, her incendiary sloganeering and her association with known ticket-stub-carrying attendees of "Fahrenheit 9/11." Rush Limbaugh went so far as to declare that Ms. Sheehan's "story is nothing more than forged documents - there's nothing about it that's real."
But this time the Swift Boating failed, utterly, and that failure is yet another revealing historical marker in this summer's collapse of political support for the Iraq war.
When the Bush mob attacks critics like Ms. Sheehan, its highest priority is to change the subject. If we talk about Richard Clarke's character, then we stop talking about the administration's pre-9/11 inattentiveness to terrorism. If Thomas Wilson is trashed as an insubordinate plant of the "liberal media," we forget the Pentagon's abysmal failure to give our troops adequate armor (a failure that persists today, eight months after he spoke up). If we focus on Joseph Wilson's wife, we lose the big picture of how the administration twisted intelligence to gin up the threat of Saddam's nonexistent W.M.D.'s.
The hope this time was that we'd change the subject to Cindy Sheehan's "wacko" rhetoric and the opportunistic left-wing groups that have attached themselves to her like barnacles. That way we would forget about her dead son. But if much of the 24/7 media has taken the bait, much of the public has not.
The backdrops against which Ms. Sheehan stands - both that of Mr. Bush's what-me-worry vacation and that of Iraq itself - are perfectly synergistic with her message of unequal sacrifice and fruitless carnage. Her point would endure even if the messenger were shot by a gun-waving Crawford hothead or she never returned to Texas from her ailing mother's bedside or the president folded the media circus by actually meeting with her.
The failure of the smear campaign against Cindy Sheehan is yet another historical marker in the collapse of support for the Iraq war.
Cindy Sheehan not allowed to watch SOU address, was arrested.
Curiously, CNN reported that Cindy had UNFURLED A BANNER INSIDE THE CHAMBER WHICH IS AGAINST THE STATE OF THE UNION ADDRESS RULES.
Half an hour later we learn that no such thing happened. Cindy simply wore a T-shirt with an antiwar message on it and was promptly hauled off to jail.
In Bushworld, you can not only be arrested and hauled off to jail for wearing a controversial T-shirt, but the major media will also make up ridiculous lies about you and broadcast them world-wide. That's some performance for a liberal press. But oh ho ho, we were all being so paranoid four years ago to claim that the press was a willing servant of deliberate Rovian disinformation spinmeisters. Once again, we are right on the mark and the Repubs? - blind and wrong and misdirected as usual - let us count the many things about which the progressive thinking people of this nation have been absolutely correct, and the Bush supporters oh so regrettably wrong. Wow, it would take pages and pages!
Can't tell them anything though - they can't admit it when they are wrong. The way things are going, they're going to deny us right into the communist USSR of 1965 - the state our teachers used to scare us about in 1965 - and we would think, oh, how awful to live in a place where the government controls all the media, where protestors are thrown in jail, where you have to be worried about speaking above a whisper if you criticize the government, because your own neighbor will turn you in! Oh those poor people, having their mail opened and never being able to see any real news, only what the govt. wants them to see!
But of course that was back in the days when dissent was patriotic, when Americans didn't spy on each other, when the govt. could not throw you in jail without a trial, when even Presidents had to resign if they wiretapped you without a warrant. You know, the OLD America, when nobody was above the law and citizens were shocked when the lies and deceit and self-serving greed of elected officials was exposed, instead of sniggering and giggling behind their hands about how bold their guys are, and ain't it grand they're still in charge.
Gee, I really miss it - was good while it lasted, and something to tell the grandkids about.
Sheehan
She also is involved with the AfterDowningStreet.org site. Last week Representative Conyers held a meeting with Joe Wilson whose wife was outed as a CIA operative by someone in the WH, Ray McGovern, an ex-CIA analyst, Cindy Sheehan and Mr. Bonifaz, attorney, concerning the Downing Street Memos. It was on C-Span twice last week.
Support for Sheehan
Please call (214) 764.6668 and leave your message for Cindy Sheehan.
We'll deliver them to Cindy in Crawford and give them to Cindy on CD
later. We will also broadcast your message on RadioLeft.com, so don't
say anything that you don't want to hear on the radio!
Also, sign the petition of support for Cindy. We helped get her on
Good Morning America but we want to help her get on more TV shows.
Sign here:
CindySheehan.com - http://www.CindySheehan.com
Sheehan/Schiavo sm
Well looks like the month-long "working vacation" is really getting screwed up. When a democrat has a dead son she is being motivated by the extreme left. Remember the Schiavo fiasco? People trying to get in to give a brain-dead woman water - which would have in fact KILLED her? I suppose they were not extremely right motivated ;duh, let me think, Bubba in Florida, conservatives watching, let's call an emergency session of congress and intervene in a family matter - WTG George, that really went over well.
Sheehan, a true patriot
I have followed this courageous woman who sacrified her son for this war and I have nothing but praise and respect for her. She is a true American.
Sheehan Feeling the Glare of the Spotlight
Some Are Focusing Anger on Protester
By Michael A. Fletcher Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, August 17, 2005; Page A03
CRAWFORD, Tex., Aug. 16 -- Cindy Sheehan rode into town 10 days ago, a forlorn mother with a question for her president: Why did my son die in Iraq?
But now the same wave of publicity and political anger that she rode to become a nationally known symbol of the antiwar movement threatens to crash down on Sheehan herself.
Conservative commentators and Web sites are taking aim at Sheehan with the same ferocity she has aimed at President Bush. In part, they are using her own words against her -- reciting such controversial comments as her vow to refuse to pay taxes to a government waging an "illegal" war and her desire to see Bush impeached.
The backlash is becoming a new object lesson in how saturation media coverage and the instinct for personal attack are shaping political debate. Some independent commentators said the pushback on the right has succeeded at scuffing the public sympathy and deference she had earned as the mother of a fallen soldier, and has shown how virtually any subject relating to the Iraq war and Bush's presidency is viewed through a partisan lens.
"Cindy Sheehan has emboldened the progressives who oppose the war and caused the conservative diehards who are behind the war to go into a defensive mode," said Michael Harrison, publisher of Talkers magazine, a trade publication for talk radio. "Cindy Sheehan is going to be a target, and they'll probably go through her past to find what they can to discredit her."
Since her son, Casey, 24, was killed in Iraq last year, Sheehan, of Vacaville, Calif., has traveled the country trying to drum up opposition to the war in Iraq. She has participated in peace conferences, demonstrations and a mock congressional hearing about the "Downing Street memo" -- notes of a meeting with British Prime Minister Tony Blair and his top advisers that said the Bush administration had decided to go to war and molded intelligence findings to support that decision.
In that time, Sheehan, 48, a soft-spoken woman who says she was radicalized by her son's death, has engaged in her fair share of inflammatory rhetoric.
"It's obvious Cindy Sheehan has become a political player, whose primary concern is embarrassing the president," Fox Television personality Bill O'Reilly wrote Tuesday in an online column. "She is no longer just a protester."
Bush, Sheehan said, lied to the American people about the war and should be impeached. She is refusing to pay taxes in hopes that the Internal Revenue Service will come after her to collect. "I'm not supporting a government that wages an illegal, immoral war," she said. "I want them to come after me, so I can put the war on trial."
Still, she said some of the statements attributed to her are distortions. Contrary to a letter attributed to her that is circulating widely on the Internet, she asserts that she has never said that the United States is waging the war in Iraq to protect Israel.
"I have said a lot of strong things, and I'll stand by everything I said," Sheehan said, adding that she thought the document had been altered. "But I didn't say that."
The scrutiny that has accompanied Sheehan's quick rise to prominence has extended to her family. Several in-laws have publicly criticized her protest -- announcing their displeasure in a release to the Drudge Report. News that Sheehan's husband, Patrick, has filed for divorce has been trumpeted by some bloggers as evidence of her extreme views. Sheehan acknowledges that some of her views are becoming a distraction. Also, she said, some groups that have aided her protest have agendas -- including conspiracy theories about the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, and some vaguely anti-Semitic theories about the cause of the war -- that she says she does not share.
Consequently, she has asked that her campsite near Bush's ranch be restricted only to organizations of military families, or those who have lost loved ones in the war.
"Attention got focused on the messenger and not the message," Sheehan said. "My thing is ending the war in Iraq. But there are a lot of people who want to attach their horse to my wagon, because of the exposure I'm getting."
The increased scrutiny of Sheehan is coming as some residents here are growing irritated with the stream of antiwar protesters drawn to her vigil.
On Tuesday, a spokeswoman for Sheehan announced plans to move the camp from the drainage ditches next to the winding road about two miles from Bush's 1,600-acre spread to a field on a ranch offered by one of Bush's neighbors. The new camp would be about a mile from the president's ranch. All that would be left behind at the original site would be three tents and hundreds of white wooden crosses bearing the names of troops killed in Iraq.
The move followed complaints by about 60 of Bush's neighbors, who petitioned McLennan County officials to expand a no-parking zone around the camp, in an effort to avert the traffic tie-ups that have become commonplace as the protest has grown. Also, Monday night a truck dragging chains and a pipe demolished some crosses; the driver, Larry Northern, 46, of Waco, Tex., was charged with criminal mischief.
Sheehan has promised to remain encamped throughout Bush's five-week stay here and to return whenever the president does. She also announced plans for a series of nearly 1,000 candlelight vigils Wednesday night across the country. Liberal advocacy groups MoveOn.org Political Action and Democracy for America are organizing the protests.
"All of this other BS just clouds my message," Sheehan said. "My message is that of a brokenhearted mom sitting down in front of George Bush's ranch, wanting to know why my son died."
Capitol Police say they *screwed up* when arresting Sheehan
Sure they did. Some lowly rogue Capitol cop decided on his own to arrest Cindy Sheehan.
Just like the lowly rogue soldiers in Iraq who have been arrested and convicted and punished because one of them had the bright idea that they should torture prisoners. None of these people could possibly have gotten orders from the Oval Office, right? Of course not. Bush hates torture, right? LOL!
Sometimes the lies are so transparent and ridiculous, all I can do is laugh.
 MSNBC.com |
NBC: Charges against Sheehan to be dropped
Antiwar mom removed from State of the Union for wearing protest shirt
NBC News and news services
Updated: 5:42 p.m. ET Feb. 1, 2006
WASHINGTON - Charges against antiwar protester Cindy Sheehan, who was arrested after an incident involving a T-shirt she wore to the State of the Union address, will be dropped, officials told NBC News Wednesday.
U.S. Capitol Police took Sheehan away in handcuffs and charged her with unlawful conduct, a misdemeanor, when she showed up to President Bush’s address Tuesday night wearing a shirt that read, “2245 Dead. How many more?” — a reference to the number of soldiers killed in Iraq.
But Capitol Police will ask the U.S. attorney's office to drop the charges, NBC News’ Mike Viqueira reported Wednesday.
“We screwed up,” a top Capitol Police official said, speaking on condition of anonymity.
He said Sheehan didn't violate any rules or laws.
Sheehan, whose son Casey died in Iraq, was not the only one ejected from the House gallery. The wife of a powerful Republican congressman was also asked to leave, but she was not arrested.
Beverly Young, wife of Rep. C.W. Bill Young of Florida — chairman of the House Defense Appropriations subcommittee — was removed from the gallery because she was wearing a T-shirt that read, “Support the Troops — Defending Our Freedom.”
The Capitol Police official said officers never should have approached Young.
Criticism from Rep. Young
Holding up the shirt his wife wore, Rep. Young said on the House floor Wednesday morning: “Because she had on a shirt that someone didn’t like that said support our troops, she was kicked out of this gallery.”
“Shame, shame,” he scolded.
Beverly Young was sitting about six rows from first lady Laura Bush and was asked to leave. She argued with police in the hallway outside the House chamber.
“They said I was protesting,” she told the St. Petersburg Times. “I said, ‘Read my shirt, it is not a protest.’ They said, ‘We consider that a protest.’ I said, ‘Then you are an idiot.”’
They told her she was being treated the same as Sheehan, who was ejected before the speech. Sheehan wrote in her blog Wednesday that she intended to file a First Amendment lawsuit.
She did not issue an immediate response to the charges being dropped.
“I don’t want to live in a country that prohibits any person, whether he/she has paid the ultimate price for that country, from wearing, saying, writing, or telephoning any negative statements about the government,” Sheehan wrote in her blog.
Sheehan was invited as a guest of Rep. Lynn Woolsey, D-Calif. She later was released on her own recognizance.
Told she could not wear shirt?
Capitol Police Sgt. Kimberly Schneider said police warned Sheehan that such displays were not allowed in the House chamber, but Sheehan did not respond, she said.
Sheehan, however, told a different story in her blog.
“I was never told that I couldn’t wear that shirt into the Congress,” Sheehan wrote. “I was never asked to take it off or zip my jacket back up. If I had been asked to do any of those things, ... I would have, and written about the suppression of my freedom of speech later.”
She said she felt uncomfortable about attending the speech.
“I knew George Bush would say things that would hurt me and anger me and I knew that I couldn’t disrupt the address because Lynn had given me the ticket,” Sheehan wrote. “I didn’t want to be disruptive out of respect for her.”
She said she had one arm out of her coat when an officer yelled, “Protester.”
“He then ran over to me, hauled me out of my seat and roughly (with my hands behind my back) shoved me up the stairs,” she wrote in her blog. She was then cuffed and driven to police headquarters a few blocks away.
Sheehan was arrested in September with about 300 other anti-war activists in front of the White House after a weekend of protests against the war in Iraq. In August, she spent 26 days camped near Bush’s ranch in Crawford, Texas, where he was spending a working vacation.
The Associated Press and NBC News contributed to this report.
![src=http://c.msn.com/c.gif?NC=1255&NA=1154&PS=69718&PI=7329&DI=305&TP=http%3a%2f%2fmsnbc.msn.com%2fid%2f11120353%2f]()
![src=http://msnbcom.112.2o7.net/b/ss/msnbcom/1/G.9-Pd-R/s83197986163419?[AQB]&ndh=1&t=1/1/2006%2020%3A0%3A8%203%20300&pageName=Story%7CU.S.%20News%7CPolitics%7C11120353%7CNBC%3A%20Charges%20against%20Sheehan%20to%20be%20dropped%7C&g=http%3A//msnbc.msn.com/id/11120353/print/1/displaymode/1098/&ch=U.S.%20News&c4=U.S.%20News&c5=Politics&c7=handheld&c8=N&c15=11120353&c16=Story&c18=17&pid=Story%7CU.S.%20News%7CPolitics%7C11120353%7CNBC%3A%20Charges%20against%20Sheehan%20to%20be%20dropped%7C&pidt=1&oid=javascript%3AprintThis%28%2711120353%27%29&ot=A&oi=576&s=1024x768&c=32&j=1.3&v=Y&k=Y&bw=644&bh=484&ct=lan&hp=N&[AQE]]()
© 2006 MSNBC.com
URL: http://msnbc.msn.com/id/11120353/
Angry Mothers and Trembling Grizzlies: The Sheehan Effect
Angry Mothers and Trembling Grizzlies: The Sheehan Effect
|
by Dr. Teresa Whitehurst |
"Sheehan has been involved in protests against Bush since last year. She founded Gold Star Families for Peace...She said she decided to seek another audience with Bush when she heard his comments about the war last week, after a spike in American deaths. The fallen men and women "died in a noble cause," Bush said Wednesday. "Their families can know that we will honor their loved ones' sacrifice by completing the mission."
"Sheehan said she wants to tell Bush not to use her son's death as a reason to continue the war, and to ask "why (Bush's twin daughters) Jenna and Barbara and the other children of the architects of this disastrous war are not in harm's way, if the cause is so noble." ArmyTimes.com, August 8, 2005
For some, Cindy Sheehan's lonely journey through the shock and sorrow of her son Casey's death in Iraq is of no interest. What, they ask, is the big deal? One soldier killed, one mother grieving – so what? Mothers have no business meddling in the manly business of war, or expressing inconvenient, disloyal, unpatriotic feelings like grief or anger. Get over it, critics command, and think about "the mission" instead, a mission that "we should see through" so that other people can't make fun of us for "cutting and running."
Instead of focusing on one poor misguided woman, or on how many more Americans and innocent Iraqi families will be killed in this war, we're told to think about how great it will be when other people admire us for killing every terrorist and future terrorist in the whole wide world. Instead of thinking about the new fundamentalist Islamic "democracy" that Bush's war has ushered in for the poor girls and women of Iraq, think about "the good news" way, way down the road when they get used to wearing the burqa and live happily ever after. In short, Americans should focus on "the big picture."
But for mothers – even those who've tried valiantly to believe the president when he exclaims that the war on Iraq is a "noble cause" – there IS no big picture. For mothers of slain soldiers, there are only little pictures: their lost child smiling at 10 months in his high chair; riding his first bike without training wheels; opening Christmas presents (Hot Wheels, Transformers, or GI Joe); and making silly faces for the camera.
The little picture encompasses all those times when parents stay up all night with their sick children, or protect them from bullies, or wipe away their tears after a friend's rejection. It's not just the happy times that mothers remember, it's the multitude of little moments, little pictures in a parent's mind, of time and love invested in one's offspring. When this enormous investment is squandered by reckless military adventures that zip kids into body bags, parents are owed great compensation. And they are owed the truth.
Do George and Laura Bush ever imagine how it would feel if all they had left of their beloved child was, as Cindy Sheehan has, a few snapshots and an abyss of sorrow in their hearts? Must they suppress their natural compassion in order to convince themselves of their own administration's spin – that it's "worth it" when American kids die far away from home for reasons that have consistently turned out to be false?
Do the Bushes feel the earth tremble beneath their feet at the mere thought that thousands of parents of slain soldiers are beginning to ask questions, to see the folly for which their children died…to find their voice?
Cindy remembers the little picture, which is why George has been hiding from her. She is his worst nightmare, for she is not just Cindy Sheehan, mother of Casey. She is Every Mother. And, no matter how uncomfortable it gets, she's not going to dishonor her son by saying, "Well okay, if you say so, I guess this war was worth my boy's life."
Support Our Wars or Else
What does it really mean to "honor" a soldier's death…and life? To say that he or she willingly died "to end terrorism" (impossible), or "make Iraq a democracy" (ditto)? Unless they were suicidal when they enlisted (I know one boy who was), dying in Iraq is not the soldier's "sacrifice" because by definition, a sacrifice is something that we choose and willingly make. Most young people never imagined when they enlisted – often for reasons their recruiters understood but their parents didn't, such as finding a sense of belonging, or escaping bad neighborhoods or dead-end jobs, or finding a way to afford college some day – that they'd be dead within a matter of months.
To swallow ridiculous, ever-changing reasons for the futile war that has killed over 1800 idealistic youths with their whole lives ahead of them is to take the easy, socially acceptable way out. Pro-war pundits and politicians constantly threaten parents with social disapproval and even hatred if they dare to question those reasons – and it's worked for a long time. Parents have felt pressured to mouth the hawks' lines, lest their love for their child be called into question.
What a devilishly mean but perfect system for subduing the parents of fallen soldiers! Politicians and talk show hosts threaten: "Support our troops (the war), or we'll accuse you of dishonoring your dead child." The last thing that worried or grieving parents can bear is the suggestion that they're "dishonoring" the memory of the one they love. And so they have acquiesced. They have submitted. Archie Bunker would be pleased: Like Edith, they've learned to stifle themselves.
Until now.
Protective Fury: The Tipping Point
One day, back when Americans lived in peace and we'd never even heard of the Bush dynasty or the plotting neocons whose reckless ambitions it would serve, I was watching a nature show about grizzly bears in their natural habitat. I will never forget one particularly electrifying scene that comes to mind whenever I hear about Cindy Sheehan's vigil outside Mr. Bush's gated compound.
A large male grizzly came upon two adorable little grizzly cubs, who looked up at him with wonder and naivete; clearly, they didn't realize the danger they were in. To my great surprise, however, the male grizzly stood bolt upright as though startled, then starting running away from those harmless little cubs. Why on earth did he do that, I wondered. The narrator explained that the male knew instinctively that there's nothing more dangerous than a mother grizzly who senses that her cubs may be harmed.
As the huge male ran off into the woods, the narrator continued: "While the male grizzly is larger and could probably kill the female, he knows that in the process, her protective fury would leave him seriously, if not mortally, wounded. Mother grizzly bears will fight to the death for their young, ripping the flesh of any animal, no matter how large, that threatens their cubs. Coming upon the youngsters frightened the adult male so badly that he ran and hid because the mother, unseen but without a doubt somewhere near by, could at any moment sniff his presence and roar into action."
Human males can also sense danger, and know very well the hazards of facing protective mothers – particularly when other mothers are watching, too. This explains why the mainstream media has worked so hard to make antiwar parents of fallen soldiers look pitiful, and why George Bush is hiding inside his compound, hoping that Ms. Sheehan will lose interest and go away.
But what the president doesn't understand is this: She's not going to lose interest, and furthermore it isn't just Cindy Sheehan anymore. Parents of servicemen and women all over the country are beginning to see the little picture again. This is the tipping point, a showdown fueled by motherly devotion that will embolden other families to start questioning the integrity and fitness of this administration and this president: It's what I call the Sheehan Effect.
And that's the worst news ever for a man who can only see the "the mission," the big picture, and how noble it will look under "Bush, George W." in the history books. |
Would you defend her?
Thursday, March 9, 2006
Last modified Wednesday, March 8, 2006 11:16 PM PST
Woman sues for alleged firing over talk show bumper sticker
By: TERI FIGUEROA - Staff Writer
VISTA ---- A San Diego County woman is suing her former employer, accusing her manager of firing her on the spot when she saw the woman's car had a bumper sticker advertising a progressive talk radio station.
The suit also alleges that, after seeing the sticker, the employer commented that the woman could be a member of al-Qaida.
In a civil suit filed at the county courthouse in Vista, Linda Laroca is targeting both her former manager, Beverly Fath, and the company she briefly worked for last year, Advantage Sales and Marketing, Inc.
Neither Laroca nor the defendants could be reached for comment Wednesday. Laroca's attorney declined comment.
Laroca, who was hired by the company as a sales representative, is seeking lost wages and damages for wrongful termination for violations of both public policy and the state labor code. She is also claiming state constitutional violations and emotional distress.
The California labor code prohibits employers from controlling or directing the political activities of employees.
According to Laroca's suit, the bumper sticker in question read only: 1360 Air America Progressive Talk Radio.
The nationwide syndicated radio programming from left-wing Air America, which describes itself as progressive entertainment talk radio features show hosts such as comedian and author Al Franken. The network programming is carried locally by radio station KLSD 1360 AM.
A call to Clear Channel-owned KLSD on Wednesday afternoon was not immediately returned.
In her Feb. 21 claim, Laroca asserts that on Oct. 8, three weeks after she started working for the marketing company, Fath called her on a Saturday and requested they meet at a nearby grocery store parking lot so Laroca could pass on some documents Fath needed.
During the brief encounter, Laroca charges, the manager pointed to the bumper sticker ---- the only one on Laroca's car ---- and remarked that it was a new sticker and called it that Al Franken left-wing radical radio station.
Laroca alleges in her suit that Fath then told her, The country is on a high state of alert. For all I know, you could be al-Qaida.
A stunned Laroca laughed nervously at the statement, the suit alleges, and then was dealt the final blow when Fath fired her on the spot.
Not asking you to defend ... just an fyi...
in looking for answers to DW's question as to who was opposing the expansion and why, I ran onto an explanation of the President's health care proposal...which I hate to admit, I did not know the particulars of, because no one in media is reporting it. It was in article by the HEW Secretary. At any rate...Bush proposes a $15,000 tax cut for every American family who buys their own private health insurance. It is estimated that it would cover 20 million more American families...the whole family, not just the children...where the SCHIP expansion would only cover 3 million more, and a good many of those newly eligible kids (under higher income limits) are already covered by private health insurance, according to the CBO study commissioned by the bipartisan congressional committee looking at the SCHIP expansion. What that basically means is that children already covered by private insurance would leave that and go to a public assistance program.
Just some alternative information. You do not need to respond and I am not trying to pick a fight. Just giving information.
AW, I am disappointed that you would defend
anyone on these boards wishing anyone else to burn in hell for eternity, particularly two very young and inexperienced women.
As far as the conservative board, if it is a "cesspool," it is at least in part because conservative posters cannot post conservative opinions there without being attacked relentlessly. I suppose it is fortunate for the liberals on this board that they have not had to experience such conditions when voicing their liberal opinions here.
So, how do you defend Mr. O's back-
the comments, the associations, etc......ROFL.
as usual....can't defend...
//
Do you also defend the innocent
people in our local prisons because I'm sure that there are a few in there who are actually innocent......however, most of them are NOT.
As for me not knowing for sure whether they were indeed tortured or not......how do you know that they were tortured? Were you there? Did you talk to them? Do you have a pin pal at Gitmo, do ya?
I'm sure there are some innocent men at Gitmo but this is war. It was war when the terrorists killed thousands of Americans in one day and then celebrated their actions. We have gone from a 9/11 mentality to a pre 9/11 mentality. We seem to have forgetten that we were attacked and that these people desire nothing more than our death.
You mean you defend all people who
are innocent. You cannot know someone else's heart no matter how much you want to think you do. When it comes to these terrorists, they have only one feeling for America and Americans - cold, calculated, murderous, black, hate! You need to wake up to this fact and accept it. I hope you do not think for a moment they would try to defend you for anything. They would cut your heart out and roast it in a NY minute!
I certainly don't defend the remarks, but they were taken out of context
Obviously, the example Bennett used of aborting every black child was a very poorly thought out example, but his remarks were also taken grossly out of context by the mainstream media. He went on say it would be a morally reprehensible thing to do. He was commenting on the idiots that said that crime or poverty was down since the legalizing of abortion. He thinks abortion of any kind is wrong...he was turning their logic around on them. He certainly does not think that every black baby should be aborted. GRANTED, there are radical right wingers (the KKK, aryan nation etc.) would think this was a great idea, but they are radical and not the mainstream as Ms. Libby FALSELY stated...
Go ahead and defend a racist
even if it's so out of character for a liberal.
Sheez! How do Repubs defend this?
Boggles the mind! But also learned another curious thing tonight - several people have told me they can't buy any ammunition for their guns, I think they told me AR15's or whatever the civilian model of an M16 is? - they said the rounds are not available by mail or at stores and they are told it's all being stopped at the ports and sent to Iraq. Say what??
Anybody else having a similar experience or know anything else about this? Would be curious to know if the situation in Iraq is really so bad that all civilian ammo has to be confiscated so it can be sent there.
Hard to defend something that isn't happening.
No problem getting ammo here in the great NW.
I am not going to defend Free Republic sm
only because no website knows who it is that is posting on it. I used to post on FR but they banned me because I didn't walk lock-step with their philosophy, which does not tolerate dissent. However, I have seen death threats right here on this site, so linking this guy to a web site isn't really relative. I hope they prosecute him. He is sick.
Not necessary to defend Obama. He's doing just fine
.
Nice try. Once again, only way to defend Obama is
nm
I defend anyone who tried to save thousands of
nm
I defend all innocent people....nm
nm
I hope you're not one of the ones who defend the lies that ...sm
launched the war in Iraq ???
If so, the hypocrisy is reeking.
You are absolutely right. And I certainly do not defend Bush on most things.
But as I said in my post to Lurker below, this is not exactly the political forum I am used to posting in. I just could not resist commenting on this issue as I feel it is deeply disturbing and all parents should look at this closely.
Even Newt Gingrich can't *defend the indefensible*
if you missed it on Hannity and Colmes, you can see the video here. Newt in his own words. Definitely worth watching.
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/05/12.html#a8260
When you can't defend the present why do you always bring up the past?
Why do you defend killing of innocent civilians?
I have never said I defend Hezbollah. I don't defend Hezbollah. They're terrorists, and they're horrible.
But blindly defending Israel, regardless of what they do, doesn't work for me either. What is most disquieting to me is that you defend Israel's placement of landmines to kill innocent civilians, designed to go off at a later date when people least expect it? Why don't you consider that terrorism, as well?
Maybe we can get David Ogden to defend him? LOLOLOL!
Nothing like a hypocrite take a fall to make MY day!
Right on Cindy
Sheehan
This is George Bush’s accountability moment. That’s why I’m here. The mainstream media aren’t holding him accountable. Neither is Congress. So I’m not leaving Crawford until he’s held accountable. It’s ironic, given the attacks leveled at me recently, how some in the media are so quick to scrutinize -- and distort -- the words and actions of a grieving mother but not the words and actions of the president of the United States.
But now it’s time for him to level with me and with the American people. I think that’s why there’s been such an outpouring of support. This is giving the 61 percent of Americans who feel that the war is wrong something to do -- something that allows their voices to be heard. It’s a way for them to stand up and show that they DO want our troops home, and that they know this war IS a mistake… a mistake they want to see corrected. It’s too late to bring back the people who are already dead, but there are tens of thousands of people still in harm’s way.
There is too much at stake to worry about our own egos. When my son was killed, I had to face the fact that I was somehow also responsible for what happened. Every American that allows this to continue has, to some extent, blood on their hands. Some of us have a little bit, and some of us are soaked in it.
People have asked what it is I want to say to President Bush. Well, my message is a simple one. He’s said that my son -- and the other children we’ve lost -- died for a noble cause. I want to find out what that noble cause is. And I want to ask him: “If it’s such a noble cause, have you asked your daughters to enlist? Have you encouraged them to go take the place of soldiers who are on their third tour of duty?” I also want him to stop using my son’s name to justify the war. The idea that we have to “complete the mission” in Iraq to honor Casey’s sacrifice is, to me, a sacrilege to my son’s name. Besides, does the president any longer even know what “the mission” really is over there?
Casey knew that the war was wrong from the beginning. But he felt it was his duty to go, that his buddies were going, and that he had no choice. The people who send our young, honorable, brave soldiers to die in this war, have no skin in the game. They don’t have any loved ones in harm’s way. As for people like O’Reilly and Hannity and Michelle Malkin and Rush Limbaugh and all the others who are attacking me and parroting the administration line that we must complete the mission there -- they don’t have one thing at stake. They don’t suffer through sleepless nights worrying about their loved ones
Before this all started, I used to think that one person couldn’t make a difference... but now I see that one person who has the backing and support of millions of people can make a huge difference.
That’s why I’m going to be out here until one of three things happens: It’s August 31st and the president’s vacation ends and he leaves Crawford. They take me away in a squad car. Or he finally agrees to speak with me.
If he does, he’d better be prepared for me to hold his feet to the fire. If he starts talking about freedom and democracy -- or about how the war in Iraq is protecting America -- I’m not going to let him get away with it.
Like I said, this is George Bush’s accountability moment.
Cindy S/Pat B.
While Cindy S. may be authentic about being a grieving mother. Her past actions compared with her actions recently don't prove her to be authentic. The point was her son volunteered to go into the armed forces. Maybe she was behind him going into the military, because she thought his going into the military meant he'd get to travel and get tuition for college, and it never crossed her mind that he would have to go to war (unrealistic way to think about serving in the armed forces in the first place) but if she had these convictions when Casey signed up then she should have been pleading for him not to enlist.
Okay, let's look at that scenario. Let's say she did plead with him him not to, because her convictions about war were exactly as they are today. That would only prove that Casey did not hold the same convictions that she did. So, in that case she is not being "authentic" in channeling what her dead son would think of her protest. She needs to go home and take care of her younger son who is pleading for her to come home, and try to heal an obviously broken marriage, but that would put a cramp in getting her face on camera.
As far as I'm concerned Pat Buchanan has nothing to do with this whole scenario. He's just another politician with another opinion, and those are about a dime a dozen.
Cindy
I don't see how a conservative, prolifer could attempt to defend his statements...nm
x
My post ' I defend all innocent people' was a reply to the
question
'Do you also defend the innocent people in our local prisons because I'm sure that there are a few in there who are actually innocent..'
Cindy McCain
sooo...because she did not use meth, crank, crack, etc - it's OKAY. (I guess when your'e filthy rich - IT IS)..wonder if you would feel that way if she were poor....it is as if you are DEFENDING her...sad...
He also lied to Cindy about his age.
He's 17 years older than her. A stupid thing to lie about. He lies just to lie. He lied when he said he would pick a VP who could step into the presidency. (Of all the women in the GOP, this was the best he could do?) He lies about drilling and how that will help the people with gas prices....laughable, but he keeps lying about that too.
That's funny because Cindy does that to me ...
We are opposite, though I do like Obama and McCain isn't too bad either, it's just his wife that gets me.
Obama's girls are beautiful. The youngest seems like she might be the "star" or handful of the family just by a few clips I've seen. :)
is cindy from alaska?
x
Cindy McCain
I was watching the RNC last night and they did a short video on Cindy McCain. She truly is a beautiful woman! They showed clips of some of the things that she has done for others and around the world. Truly an admirable and inspiring woman!! She is the type of woman I want as First Lady!
Cindy = Diana?
She's fragile - reportedly wearing about $300,000 of outfit in that golden dress (depending on whether or not the diamond earrings were real or fake. That's the cost of a decent home. She can afford to fly all over the place and do nice things for people. Her marriage has been riddled with telling these little white lies or hiding things from one another. Now she is Sarah's friend as well ~ a revivalist, beauty queen, who with her Assembly of God roots will try to lead us all to salvation. Hillary is much more of the woman I would want to align myself with.
Cindy is 54; Michelle is 44
x
What is Cindy doing to the jews? This is news.
x
They were in danger before Cindy even thought
about going to Crawford. Can this be evidenced by increasing US losses? If there are more losses, it probably has more to do with the constitution that the sunni's are rejecting, not Cindy Shehan. The marine who wrote the letter to Ohio that's posted on the con board is entitled to his opinion, but I think the responsibility is misplaced. I pray for his safe return home.
The post was addressing someone else's son, not Cindy's, I believe.
.
Cindy McCain is a "druggie"?
nm
|
!["](http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/photo/largerPhoto/images/enlarge_tab.gif"){kind=small}
![Cindy](http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/photo/2005/08/16/PH2005081601715.jpg")
