Sheehan should not get a pass because she is grieving. Lots of people grieve without turning over their soul to political action committees. Instead we should ask what credentials she claims gives her special insight to her issues. A dead son is not a special credential. Again, lots of folks have dead relatives. I see nothing in Ms. Sheehan’s life experience or education or intelligence that makes her opinion any more worth of my consideration than the guy who packed my groceries this morning at the Piggily Wiggily.

We Support Our Peaceniks When They Grow The #@%$ Up.

Yeah, check out who else supports her.

Birds of a feather...

Beth,

You posted that just about teh same time I did...

We support our idiot warbloggers when they understand the difference between a sound argument and a fallacy.

Adn we'll support Cindy Sheehan when she learns destroying Israel and screwing 25 million Iraqis won't bring back her son.

Doh! ;-)

Does Crawford not have any hardware stores? Somebody needs to give Ms. Sheehan a screwdriver so she can tighten up the screws that are loose in what's left of her brain.

There are doubtless elements in the world that would like to "destroy Israel, "but from what I read, Cindy Sheehan, like most of the world, would just like Sharonista Israel to treat the Palestinians fairly.

Unlike here in Freedom's Land, the rest of the people see what is being done in the occupied territories.

Austin, Arabs want all Jews eradicated from Palestine/Israel. Cindy Sheehan and her "friends" at the Crawford Peace House do as well.

Pardon me if the Israeli's get a little jumpy after 50 years of fighting for their lives.

it's funny, ariel sharon and cindy sheehan agree - they want israel to pull out of what is now accepted as palestine. well, sharon wants israel to pull out of part of it at least.

and yet somehow i missed your post where you compare sharon to nazis...

Kevin,

Learn your history, bub. Gaza has never been part of Israel, it is an occupied territory captured during the Six-Day War and kept as a buffer against further invasion by the Egyptians.

Uh, I believe that guy was talking to that other guy because he wanted to get the BRITISH out of Palestine.

Moron.

Actually, Mr. a Moron, if you clicked the clearly labeled link title "planning it since 1941," it gives some detail of exactly what they were discussing, which was the erradication of Israeli Jews. al Husseini went so far is to recruit 20,000 Muslims for the SS.

Nice try.

A picture says more than words...

CC,

I wish I could remember where I first found that pic on the web. I remember I saw it from serveral sources on an image search, but I can't remember where from, or even if it was possible to figure out who it came from.

In any event, I'm glad you could use it as well.

somehow, as a liberal jew who has lived in israel, i support sheehan in her attempts to meet with bush. isn't going to a premediated war with false pretences, making up new goals (just as untruthful
), and then trying to wash our hands of the mess we created (condi's "iraqi process... not US process") at least a bit unethical?
as much as my heart goes out to the gaza settlers ( and there is no easy solution there), gaza was indeed only a buffer zone set up by israel, and the settlers seems to be in the same situation that former jordanians and syrians (now "palestinians") were in when israeil took over the west bank.
and what is this crap about left wingers being mostly antisemitic? in the 30s-50s jews were frequently labeled as the masterminds of communism, or are they the money hording hollywood-owning capitalist cospirators duke claims them to be?

Does Sheehan blame Israel and the Jews for 9\11, WW2, the Great Depression and the Black Plague too?

Gennadyi,

You are basing your comments on untruths, as so many of the liberal taking points are.

Bush's goals have been constant from the beginning, which is easily verifiable by reading his speeches for yourself, instead of relying on the media and pundits. Everything he claimed then he claims now, with the obvious exception that we have not found WMDs. The fact that there were not there is an intelligence failure made by not just President Bush, but by both parties in both houses of Congress, most allied governments, and even Saddam's own generals. thee is a difference between telling a lie, and making a decision based upon bad infomration. Try acknowledging that fact.

Bush has not shifted goals, the media has just changed the coverage. Don't rely on me, however, or anyone else. Go read his speeches at the White House web site. Say what you will about the man, he does not change horses in midstream.

As for "washing our hands" that is EXACTLY what Cindy Sheehan wants to do. She wants us to wash our hands of Iraq, Afghanistan and yes, Israel as well. She would hang 56 million people out to dry to become terrorist targets. Perhaps you can live with that. I cannot.

The far left wing (not ordinary Democrats) if you haven't noticed, is becoming very anti-Semetic. Liberal leaning churches and other organizations try to hurt Israel economically with divestment, and the epithet de jour on the left is "neo-con," their favorite code word for Jews.

Of course, I would have thought that David Duke standing right behind her (philosophically) would have been enough to freak you out, but liberals don't make much sense, anyway.

I would suggest not using the term anti-Semetic which gives this form of hatred a scientific gloss; I think the simple and very clear term of "Jew Hatred" sums up the real thing going on here.

to CY,

CY: You are basing your comments on untruths, as so many of the liberal taking points are.
Bush's goals have been constant from the beginning, which is easily verifiable by reading his speeches for yourself, instead of relying on the media and pundits. Everything he claimed then he claims now, with the obvious exception that we have not found WMDs. The fact that there were not there is an intelligence failure made by not just President Bush, but by both parties in both houses of Congress, most allied governments, and even Saddam's own generals. thee is a difference between telling a lie, and making a decision based upon bad infomration. Try acknowledging that fact.
Bush has not shifted goals, the media has just changed the coverage. Don't rely on me, however, or anyone else. Go read his speeches at the White House web site. Say what you will about the man, he does not change horses in midstream.

G: When we entered this war we entered it going after al qaeda and the taliban. With no proven ties we shifted focus from afganistan to iraq claiming immediate danger to the US because of saddam’s wmd’s. bin laden – saddam ties still not found (mind you I won’t argue that taking saddam down was wrong). Eventually the war on terrorism and terrorist organizations became operation “Iraqi liberation”. Now it seems more like “Iraqi occupation” – an imperialistic occupation. The shift is evident in bush’s speeches. Note the change in the frequency of the following words in his speeches over time: bin laden, taliban, wmd’s, saddam, wmd’s, wmd’s, wmd’s, Iraqi freedom/democracy/liberation, and now constitution. You don’t see a change in emphasis?

CY: As for "washing our hands" that is EXACTLY what Cindy Sheehan wants to do. She wants us to wash our hands of Iraq, Afghanistan and yes, Israel as well. She would hang 56 million people out to dry to become terrorist targets. Perhaps you can live with that. I cannot.

G: from reading sheehan’s speeches and from listening to her it seems to me like all she wants is an honest explanation, minus bulls***, as to “why did we go to war?” “why are our kids dying there?” is it so treacherous to want to know the truth about a project that is costing us hundreds of lives and millions of dollars, not to mention the thousands of Iraqi citizens suffering through this on the ground?
and you know what? If the president simply admitted to the frequent errors in this campaign, I’d feel much better about him. It’s the constant change in goals, the covering up of mistakes and bold headed stubbornness and lies that bush made into his policy that shakes my trust in this administration.

CY: The far left wing (not ordinary Democrats) if you haven't noticed, is becoming very anti-Semetic. Liberal leaning churches and other organizations try to hurt Israel economically with divestment, and the epithet de jour on the left is "neo-con," their favorite code word for Jews.

G: Well, there are always fanatics on both sides of an argument. The far right has plenty of their own bigots. Atheist republicans, anti-semite liberals, pacifist arabs, militant jews, they all exist and like them or not we all have to compromise on some issues. That’s where civilized political process comes into play. are you going to berate me for this point, too?

CY: Of course, I would have thought that David Duke standing right behind her (philosophically) would have been enough to freak you out, but liberals don't make much sense, anyway.

G:As for duke’s stand, he seems to be standing right behind fox’s coverage of Sheehan and not her.

OK Confused Yankee. Palestine = Israel (including the West Bank) as you say. So then I guess all those West Bank Palestinians treated like shit, prevented from voting or owning property, segregated and forced to use separate roads, separate (and inferior) schools and water supplies, kicked off their farms are Israeli citizens too, eh? Then why treat them as fourth-class indentured servants, virtual chattel? Why not give them full suffrage and declare them to be full citizens, just the same?

I'm not going to trot out the tired Israel = Apartheid South Africa trope here b/c I think that's an exaggeration, but then again, the "Pallies" are hardly regarded with much respect either. I'd be cool with Israel making one of two choices: Either hold on to the West Bank and give the Palestinians there full citizenship and rights, or withdraw from the West Bank (maybe holding onto a few of the bigger settlements near the border that were set up after 1967-- those weren't much populated beforehand anyway). This half-assed holding onto the West Bank, while treating the Palestinians as an occupied people, just ain't working.

BTW your little mud-slinging campaign against Sheehan is especially lame. I'm not particularly enthusiastic about the way she appropriates the martyr status for herself, but then again, she's sacrificed far more than most Americans for the Iraq War, which was a crock to begin with. In practical terms alone, you're, uh, not getting much traction by mudslinging against the mother of a guy who actually got away from his computer screen and put his ass on the line on Iraq so the rest of us the hawks could keep a safe distance. (Have you signed up to serve in Iraq, for that matter?)

Also, please stop calling yourself a "libertarian" or a "neolibertarian." I'm a libertarian who works with libertarians on a daily basis, and there's not a single libertarian who supports the Iraq War. It's the very opposite of libertarian goals-- the ultimate example of a Statist, coercive intervention that demands more government appropriation of the people's financial and human resources to further the goals of the State in foreign imperial objectives. You support a warlike, imperialist, neo-colonialist government in its campaign against a people that never attacked us-- and you call yourself a "libertarian Confederate"? Learn the meaning of those terms before you appropriate them for yourself. They are the very opposite of what you advocate.

Daemon,

The Palestinians tried to wipe out all the Jews in Israel in no less than six wars since 1948, and continue to teach their children to do the same. The Palestinians have the entire Middle East they could choose to call home, but choose to try to drive Israel into the sea. Sorry if I can't work up but so much sympathy for them.

As far as Cindy Sheehan goes, she's proven that she is full of hate and rage, which is her right right up until it threatens the lives of others. Her call for an unconditional surrender (what elese can you consider and immediate, headlong withdrawal?) would jeopardize millions of people, and she doesn't care. And for the record, junior, she hasn't sacrificed a damn thing.

She suffered a loss, but that is not the same as making a sacrifice. Casey made the sacrifice. Cindy would make it a sacrifice for nothing.

You don't know any liberatarians or neolibs that support the war? Not one?

You must run in small circles, indeed.

Great post, CY. Cindy's problem is that she believes and is propagating the Great Lie, that all of the world's problems will be solved if Israel leaves the territories. If you repeat the Great Lie enough times, it becomes the truth, no? She learned well from the Nazis.

Thanks for setting the record straight.

Yankee,
Gaza was inhabited mostly by sefardic Jews continualy from biblical times until 1948 when the area was anexed by Egypt and Jews had to flee or die. Nineteen years later it was returned to Jewish control, Gaza is one of the few areas where there are land titles dating to the Ottoman Empire prooving Jewish ownership, Hevron and parts of Jerusalem are also titled to Jews and documented by muslim governors.

She suffered a loss, but that is not the same as making a sacrifice. Casey made the sacrifice. Cindy would make it a sacrifice for nothing.

Has it come to this comfortable and abstract hair-splitting?