August 24, 2005

Anti-War Anti-American Protesters Have No Shame

I fully respect the right of folks to protest -- even against the war in Iraq. I even acknowledge their right (though not the propriety) of their use of the most vile of slogans .

But I think a line is crossed when the anti-War anti-American demonstrations are held outside military hospitals.

The Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington, D.C., the current home of hundreds of wounded veterans from the war in Iraq, has been the target of weekly anti-war demonstrations since March. The protesters hold signs that read "Maimed for Lies" and "Enlist here and die for Halliburton."

The anti-war demonstrators, who obtain their protest permits from the Washington, D.C., police department, position themselves directly in front of the main entrance to the Army Medical Center, which is located in northwest D.C., about five miles from the White House. Among the props used by the protesters are mock caskets, lined up on the sidewalk to represent the death toll in Iraq.

Code Pink Women for Peace, one of the groups backing anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan's vigil outside President Bush's ranch in Crawford Texas, organizes the protests at Walter Reed as well.

Yeah, that's right -- they are protesting wounded vets in a military hospital. So much for all the rhetoric we hear about the anti-war anti-American protesters being concerned about the troops.

And given Sheehan's prominent association with the sponsor of the Walter Reid demonstrations, it is simply one more reason to question whether she really gives a damn about American men and women in uniform. If she cannot bring herself to denounce this particular activity by Code Pink and cut her ties with a group that would engage in such tactics, then I think we have to question her commitment to anything other than an agenda which supports the killers of her son.

Posted by: Greg at 11:15 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 318 words, total size 2 kb.

1 Demonstrating outside a military hospital with those slogans is pretty low, even lower than some of PETA's propaganda to scare innocent kids. But it would take a bit more than that for me to call them anti-Americans. I'd go as far as calling them heartless though.

Posted by: Sherri at Thu Aug 25 01:45:49 2005 (iVfQF)

2 Heartless and anti-Americans. Many of those injured are proud of their service to help protect America. And some of them are trying to get better so they can go back to their troops in Iraq.

Here is more of Sheehan's ludicrousness and her lacking any logic that falls in line with the Pink Brigade:


MATTHEWS: Can I ask you a tough question? A very tough question.

SHEEHAN: Yes.

MATTHEWS: All right. If your son had been killed in Afghanistan, would you have a different feeling?

SHEEHAN: I don't think so, Chris, because I believe that Afghanistan is almost the same thing. We're fighting terrorism. Or terrorists, we're saying. But they're not contained in a country. This is an ideology and not an enemy. And we know that Iraq, Iraq had no terrorism. They were no threat to the United States of America.

MATTHEWS: But Afghanistan was harboring, the Taliban was harboring al-Qaida which is the group that attacked us on 9/11.

SHEEHAN: Well then we should have gone after al-Qaida and maybe not after the country of Afghanistan.

MATTHEWS: But that's where they were being harbored. That's where they were headquartered. Shouldn't we go after their headquarters? Doesn't that make sense?

SHEEHAN: Well, but there were a lot of innocent people killed in that invasion, too. ... But I'm seeing that we're sending our ground troops in to invade countries where the entire country wasn't the problem. Especially Iraq. Iraq was no problem. And why do we send in invading armies to march into Afghanistan when we're looking for a select group of people in that country?

So I believe that our troops should be brought home out of both places where we're obviously not having any success in Afghanistan. Osama bin Laden is still on the loose and that's who they told us was responsible for 9/11.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8972147/

At the beginning of this interview, for Afghanistan. But notice Chris' softball in the second comment "But Afghanistan was harboring.."
And then Sheehan goes on to say that we shouldn't invaded Afghanistan but just Al Qaeda.

Hello? McFly? *knock* *knock*...the Taliban is in line with Al Qaeda's beliefs and mission, and they're all over in Afghanistan.









Posted by: mmcconnell at Thu Aug 25 03:07:32 2005 (xZw2C)

3 I can accept opposition to the war as a legitimate -- though incorrect -- position. I draw the line at actively arguing that the US is a terrorist state and the terrorists are freedom fighters. And protesting and taunting the wounded is well beyond the realm of being anti-war -- it indicates a pathological hatred of America.

Posted by: Rhymes With Right at Thu Aug 25 13:20:54 2005 (tfoe3)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
9kb generated in CPU 0.0043, elapsed 0.0179 seconds.
21 queries taking 0.0148 seconds, 32 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
[/posts]