Today on Blogcritics
Home » Cindy Sheehan: Anti-Semite or Jewish Hero?

Cindy Sheehan: Anti-Semite or Jewish Hero?

Please Share...Print this pageTweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

Cindy Sheehan is purported to have said that if Israel pulls out of Palestine it will contribute to a reduction in terror. That sounds like a pretty reasonable statement to me. If I hear another white, right-wing, Christian pundit speak for the Jewish community again and call Cindy Sheehan an anti-Semite for that statement, I think I am going to explode. The same goes for the Jewish pundits who are part of a radical minority of Jews in they way they come down on this issue. It is obscene and wrong to call her anti-Semitic, and all Jews in the country should pay close attention to and not forget the arguments that the GOP and its mouthpieces are trying to make on this occasion.

As a member of the Jewish community I can say that it is likely that the vast majority of Jews in this country (76% of whom voted for John Kerry) realize that the separation between George Bush and Cindy Sheehan on the Israel issue is minimal at best. Bush did better with Jews than his predecessors, but to come away in 2004 with just 24% of the Jewish vote, and then to try to play the “religion-card” in this circumstance leaves a bitter taste in my mouth. There is an underlying feeling of anti-Semitism emanating from the person playing the “religion-card”.

A small minority of Jews believe in a manner similar to Republicans and the George Bush administration. They believe that anything goes; the ends justifies the means; ethics is not important as long as you win; caring for the poor, sick, and helpless in the community take a back seat to capitalism, and it is better to get a tax cut during war than to shoulder a heavier weight to prepare our government (and its budget deficit) for our children. Most Jews do not subscribe to this philosophy.

We are by and large Democrats and we by and large share the values of Cindy Sheehan, and to tarnish her as an anti-Semite and associate her with the likes of racist-Republican David Duke, as some have done, is obscene. Some Jews in this small minority may speak out against Cindy Sheehan. While they are entitled to their opinions, they are not entitled to speak for the vast majority of Jews. The voices of this radical minority are much louder right now, and in fact this is a direct result of the Republican Party having a superior message machine and media infrastructure than the Democrats.

A brief history lesson might be instructive as to why the political party in America with a “religion problem” and a “race problem” is the Republican Party. Howard Dean called the Republican Party mainly a “white-Christian party”. One can argue about whether he was tactful or not when he said it, but what he said was essentially true. One of the ONLY demographics Republicans win consistently is white, Christian men. Lucky for them it is a large demographic. Democrats, on the other hand, win with Latinos, blacks, immigrants, gays, and Jews (pretty much everyone else).

These voters are not stupid. They vote the way they do for reasons. Most Jews support Democrats for the very reason that there is no component of racism or religious persecution in that party. Moreover the Democrats by and large believe in peace, social justice, social tolerance, religious tolerance, minimum wages and standards that can improve the lives for the weakest among us, cheaper health care for the sick, dying, and mentally ill, and an education system that works in a manner that is equal for all, and without any external religions pushed on the students.

Most Jews support Cindy Sheehan because she is acting in a manner that is consistent with (and even required by) the bible. She is speaking out for peace in a non-violent manner, and almost shaming the President to finally devise a plan for Iraq. Anyone who would attack her for that is suspect at best. From a Christian perspective you should ask yourself “what would Jesus be doing?” Would he be protesting the war right now or flying a fighter jet to carpet-bomb Fallujah?

The “white-Christian” Republican Party is supported mainly by the “white-Christian” Southerners–the same descendants of former slaveholders, with an only partially changed mentality. Abraham Lincoln called himself a Republican, but everyone knows that the Republican Party of Lincoln is now the Democratic Party, and the descendants of the Democratic Party of the segregated-South, make up the current Republican base.

The anti-Semitic, anti-black Southerners, from Zell Miller, to David Duke, to Tony Perkins, to Trent Lott, to Jesse Helms, to Strom Thurmond, are all remnants of the racist past of the Democratic Party, who are now firmly implanted at the highest levels of the Republican Party. Some of these Republicans have even switched parties in our lifetime from Democrat to Republican, ala Strom Thurmond and David Duke, or switched this millenium ala Zell Miller, providing even further proof that if Abraham Lincoln were alive today he would be called a “liberal” by James Dobson and would be a key component of the Democratic Party.

This shift is not unnoticed to Jews, and apparently other minorities see it as well (88% of African-Americans voted for Kerry). The base of the segregated South is now the Republican base. The family-values, anti-gay, Christian prayer in school crowd, who are a danger to Jewish culture and an overt threat to the African-American descendants of the freed slaves, are the people that should be worried about the label of anti-Semite, not Cindy Sheehan.

Cindy Sheehan’s statement on Israel, if she even made them at all, sounds exactly like Bush’s public position. She wants Israel to leave Palestine and she thinks that will contribute to peace in the Middle East. Guess what, big shocker, SHE IS RIGHT. Israel pulling back will not be an end all to terror, nothing will, but certainly it will help. If Cindy Sheehan understands this fundamental concept, why doesn’t George Bush?

This post is also available at RAFC.org and
Blogger News Network

Powered by

About Balletshooz

  • Nancy

    Uhhh…isn’t that what the Israeli government concluded, & why they’re pulling all the settlers out of the Gaza? Are they anti-Semitic too?

  • Nancy

    Republican think that if they repeat “We’re the party of inclusion” often enough & loud enough it will make it true. Unfortunately, there are enough brainless people/voters out there who think that if they hear it enough it must be true.

  • Balletshooz

    They can claim to be the “party of inclusion” until the cows come home, but it doesnt make it true. Until they start getting votes it will be just words and nothing more, and to see the republicans play the religion card here is infuriating, since they are advocating for a pullout of Gaza. That is a slap in the face to Israel more than what Sheehan is alleged to have said.

  • mk

    There is, and never has been a Palestine, at least as a nation. There are Israeli arabs who left in 1948 when the other arab nations attacked and Jordanian arabs, so Israel cannot get out of Palestine.

    Israel’s pullback will not lead to peace. Even now, Hamas is proclaiming that the next step is moving on to the West Bank and Jerusalem. The only solution acceptable to the “Palestinians” is elimination of the Jews.

    Blaming terrorism on Israel or US policy is like blaming a woman for her rape because she “looked like she wanted it”. You would be wrong in both instances.

  • billy

    why then is bush trying to get the us out of gaza? are you confused about the two state solution and confusing that purposefully with the destruction of israel?

    if gaza is called part of “palestine” then the difference between bush and sheehan is merely semantics.

  • http://sussfr.blogspot.com Matthew T. Sussman

    What this site needs is more cowbell Sheehan.

  • http://selfaudit.blogspot.com Aaman

    Cindy says on this issue,

    Another “big deal” today was the lie that I had said that Casey died for Israel. I never said that, I never wrote that. I had supposedly said it in a letter that I wrote to Ted Koppel’s producer in March. I wrote the letter because I was upset at the way Ted treated me when I appeared at a Nightline Town Hall meeting in January right after the inauguration. I felt that Ted had totally disrespected me. I wrote the letter to Ted Bettag and cc’d a copy to the person who gave me Ted’s address. I believe he changed the email and sent it out to capitalize on my new found notoriety by promoting his own agenda. Enough about that.

  • RKC

    After Israel has created borders that it has continually expanded in violation of every rule of international law; on the excuse that the end always justifies the means; then it should be no surprise that terrorism has flourished. Israel has exhibited a denial of justice to the victims of its permanent aggression and it is a primary reason for terrorism.

  • toetweet

    Cindy Sheehan was interviewed yesterday by Anderson Cooper. She stated clearly that she NEVER MADE THAT STATEMENT ABOUT ISREAL!!!

  • RKC

    After two years of war in Iraq — who has benefited?

    Neither the United States nor Iraq has benefited.

    Only Israel — which has had its prime enemy, Saddam, removed from power, has benefited. Israel has not had one casualty and has not spent any money to achieve its #1 stated goal. It is no secret that Sharon has said that the “road to peace in Palestine goes through Baghdad.”

    The fact that Bush and Sharon met in Washington just before Bush announced his intent to invade Iraq has to be more than coincidence.

    Did Bush get Sharon to agree to get out of Gaza in return for Bush getting rid of Saddam?

  • Balletshooz

    Israel may have benefited from the Iraq war, but I wouldnt push off what Bush did as being BECAUSE of Israel. Bush has his agenda regardless. Yes Israel benefited, but even Israel withdrawing wont stop terrorists. Terrorists want to kill all Jews and Americans no matter what we do.

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    Stop being sensible, BS, it’s disorienting to those of us who’ve read your other writing.

    Dave

  • RKC

    RE:: Comment 11

    Israel indeed has benefited from the Iraq war. No one else has. Is this sheer coincidence?

    Yes, Bush’s war in Iraq obviously won’t stop terrorism — but Bush did not realize this when he was conned into it.

    Anyone with half a brain could have predicted the outcome — more terrorism.

    Terrorists want to kill all Jews and Americans no matter what we do?

    No matter what we do?

    Why do they not kill others? Is it because others are not in their face?

  • Balletshooz

    Dave, OK, I’ll jump back into my “knee-jerk liberalism” from here on out. Sorry you are dizzy, but not everything Bush does is an executable offense. In some ways Bush to me is like inspector gadget. every once in a while he does something right, although its invariably for the wrong reasons.

  • RKC

    RKC, some of what you say is dead on.

    except

    “Israel indeed has benefited from the Iraq war. No one else has”

    I would have to say that Halliburton has benefited enormously, and at the expense of the American taxpayer.

    Yes involvement in the middle east like this, in the end, will stir up more terrorists. that is obvious to everyone who is awake. That is why I am behind Cindy Sheehan, because the quicker we can resolve Iraq and get out of there the better it is for the US and Israel.

  • Balletshooz

    Oops, Post 15 is not RKC, its Balletshooz, sorry for impersonating you RKC.

  • RKC

    Anyone who doesn’t see the connection between what Sharon wanted Bush to do in Iraq and our invasion of Iraq has been asleep. It cannot be a coincidence that Bush reversed telling Sharon to get out of the West Bank and declared Iraq to be the problem in the Middle East — just after Sharon met with Bush in mid-2002.

    When Sharon tells Bush to jump, Bush doesn’t have to ask how high – he’s been told by AIPAC.

    What is important to AIPAC is that the right-wing Likud party in Israel gets what it wants from the United States. As a result of this connivance, almost two thousand Americans won’t jump, or walk, or breathe anymore, and the end is not in sight.

  • http://journals.aol.com/vicl04/VictorLana Victor Lana

    If (IF) Cindy Sheehan said that about Israel then she is not lying. How will there ever be peace if Israel stays in “occupied” lands?

    The problem is (I’ve been to Israel twice in 1981 and 2000) that it doesn’t stop there. Everyone I spoke to while in Israel (admittedly all Jewish) told me that whatever they give up will never be enough. There will be no peace EVER.

    If the perception of those I spoke to is true, then Gaza is the beginning of what? Just another period of terrorism and “negotiations” until Israel gives up more of the West Bank. Then, of course, there is the question of Jerusalem, Israel’s “eternal” capital.

    Sadly, peace in this part of the world seems more the stuff of dreams than reality.

  • Balletshooz

    Exactly, withdrawing from Gaza just gets Palestinians closer to demanding a withdrawl from Jerusalem which can never happen. Thus, there will always be a gripe toward Israel, even with this move. So why is Bush pushing so hard for them to do it? Israel should stop backing up, but also work to help the Palestinians improve their conditions with the understanding that there is only so far Israel can recede until they are living in the ocean.

  • RKC`

    RE: Comment 15

    You say “that Halliburton has benefited enormously, and at the expense of the American taxpayer”.

    And that is the REASON we are at war in Iraq?

    That is ridiculous.

  • Balletshooz

    The REASON we went to Iraq? Your guess is as good as mine. Bush gave us 20 different reasons and each time they were shown to be not true. I dont know his real reason, I just disagree that Israel’s security had much to do with it. My best guess is that at the heart of it Bush is delusional and has bad judgment and thought this was a good idea at the time, and that we could really sweep in there on a bed of roses and be held up by crowds of cheering Iraqis.

  • RKC

    We went to war in Iraq for one reason. To defeat terrorism by stabilizing the Middle East. That is a very noble objective. However, the plan was doomed from the outset.

    The problem of “terrorism” can be stated in one sentence. We are in CONFLICT with extremists on both sides of the Middle East conflict.

    On the Israeli side, the extremists are those supported by the American-Zionist Lobby, who believe that they have a God-given right to Arab land.

    On the other side are Arab extremists who oppose Israel’s occupation of their land, which they then wrap in their religion to motivate their followers.

    At the core of the problem is Israeli resistance to implementing United Nations resolutions and support of this Israeli resistance by the United States. This is so obvious that even a school child could comprehend it.

    The side wanting no part of a just resolution of the problem is clear. In May, 2002, an Arab League offer of peace and diplomatic recognition of Israel in exchange for Israel returning to pre-1967 borders should have started a dialogue that by now should have produced results. It hasn’t. It hasn’t because Israel rejects peace offers out of hand knowing that the United States will fully support whatever it does.

    The offer required Israel to abide by UN Resolutions 242 and 338. Israel rejected the offer out of hand and the US was silent.

    So, the source of the problem can be traced to the foreign policy of this country. The problem in this country is that the first allegiance of members of AIPAC is to Israel, and the first allegiance of most of our politicians is to AIPAC.

    What is ignored is that Palestinians eventually accepted United Nations resolutions that partitioned Palestine. Now it is the Israelis who do not accept the United Nations resolutions. Regardless of numerous resolutions, Israel has continued to build and expand illegal settlements on Arab lands.

    To achieve peace, Israel must end the occupation of the West Bank and remove all its illegal settlements. Israel is the only country in the world allowed to ignore international law in serious matters. The support by the United States is unique in that it is the only country in the world supporting this flagrant violation of law.

    The United States shows its hypocrisy by declaring that the Israeli settlements in the West Bank are illegal and then does nothing to stop them, and in fact, helps by continuing to send billions of American taxpayers’ dollars, without which, settlement expansions would have to be curtailed.

    Peace can be achieved immediately in the Middle East by Israel returning to pre-1967 borders and the establishment of a Palestinian state. As we did in the former Yugoslavia, we should commit military forces to protecting the sovereignty of each entity. This is what the Palestinians want. Israel does not. Israel wants to keep confiscated Arab land. The Palestinians want the land confiscated by Israel.

    The Palestinians have repeatedly requested a peace-keeping force such as the ones we provide elsewhere in the world, but the United States has opposed any international peacekeeping force to satisfy Israel. Consider the fact that in the Balkans we did not defer to the Serbs when they opposed our involvement, yet that is what we have done in the Middle East, where the stakes are much higher for Americans.

  • http://livefromblogdahd.blogspot.com/ demabloggery

    http://www.livefromblogdhad.blogspot.com/

    Let me get this straight. This woman feeds the “zionists control America” myth by claiming it’s all for Israel (not even entertaining the possibility that Israel is a pawn in the oil game, which is the other more credible, though simplistic theory advanced for the Iraq war) and this guy doesn’t believe that is anti-semitic? In other words, if you say “oh, well the neocon zionists really DO run washington” and your Jewish, then that’s okay? I got about two paragraphs into this article and couldn’t stomach another word.
    David Duke has apparently now written an article in favor of this position. HOw does that grab yah?

  • http://barbarany_9.blogspot.com Barbara

    from the horse’s mouth

  • Maestromichalos

    Let’s define semite.

    Decendant of “Shem”

    Who begat…. hmmm… somewhere down there is the Patriarch Abraham, who begat Ishmael through Hagar…

    Which begat the “Arabs”

    and further more the decendants of Abraham by Rachael begat who?

    Jacob, who later was known as Israel
    Who became the 12 tribes of Israel who
    DISAPPEARED after the Assyrian captivity.

    Interesting?

    Probably not….

    However… the 12 tribes according to prophesy… “will not know who they are”

    Hmmmm…

    That would mean that the inhabitants of the “State of Israel” shouldn’t know who they are. Are they imposters?

    Why are they subjugating their own bloodline, through Hagar.

    If an Arab is called an anti-Semite… it MUST be a falsehood, as the Arabs are decendants of SHEM… and so are the Israelites… who “disappeared” and “know not who they are”…

    Anyone up for some OT theology tonight.

    It’s clear to me…. that EVERYONE is AFU and doesn’t have a clue who ANYONE associated with OT bloodlines is.

    Hmmm… perhaps the inhabitants of the state of Israel, aren’t really who they say they are.

    I heard hints of that prior to 9/11 but the media fix was in after 9/11 and everyone seems to have forgotten, including (the late great) Peter Jennings who brought it to light when Yassar Arafat was getting his ass kicked by the Israeli’s and broadcast news was up in arms about the whole situation in Gaza.

    But Peter is dead from … “lung cancer” probably a Mossad plot.

    Was Lewinski a Mossad agent or was Linda Tripp a Mossad agent…

    My GAWD everyone is talking about the WTC conspiracy when the REAL conspiracy is right in front of your faces!

    It’s a bloodline cover up.

    Dare I say…. study the writings of antiquity and show yourselves approved?

    Does anyone else see that, or is it just me?

  • http://www.roblogpolitics.blogspot.com RJ

    Cindy Sheehan is a Leftist loon. Even her own family thinks so.

    However, lots of people who hate Jews seem to like her…

  • http://www.roblogpolitics.blogspot.com RJ

    “But Peter is dead from … “lung cancer” probably a Mossad plot.”

    Ah, the anti-Semites have arrived to support Ms. Sheehan…

    BIG surprise…

  • gonzo marx

    and even RJ’s dog hates him, they had to tie pork chops around his nect to make it play with him

    hey..pork chops..those aren’t kosher!!

    therefore, RJ must be an anti-semite!!

    geeeeEEEEEEeeeeeezzZZZzzzzum crow!!

    give the attack dog bullshit a rest, plz?

    k?

    tnx!

    Excelsior!

  • billy

    The only effective way the right can attack Sheehan now is to make up things she said about Israel (which she didnt even say) or to make up statements of racists, who happen to be Republican members of the legislature, (i.e., David Duke), who fictionally support Sheehan even though they would rather be caught dead before caught supporting a Democrat. Are we really to believe that?

    She has morphed into “Mother Sheehan” and to attack her is like attacking Gandhi, Nelson Mandela, or Mother Theresa, and puts you on the wrong side of history.

  • billy

    Becasuse of Bush, see link

    terrorists are celebrating the “surrender” of Israel and retreat from Gaza. Thanks Mr. Bush, you are such a tough guy on foreign policy, you have pushed Israel out into an even smaller country, and now terrorists are cheering their surrender.

    Cindy Sheehan would have had a better Israel policy than you.

  • RKC

    RE: Comment 23

    “Let me get this straight. This woman feeds the “zionists control America” myth by claiming it’s all for Israel — not even entertaining the possibility that Israel is a pawn in the oil game…”.

    No — it’s not about being a pawn in the oil game. It’s about our bought-and-paid-for foreign policy.

    On June 8, 1967, Israeli warplanes and torpedo boats launched a ferocious two-hour attack against the USS Liberty, an American intelligence ship operating in the eastern Mediterranean. Of the 294 men aboard the vessel, 34 were killed and 172 were wounded.

    For years the survivors kept silent about what happened, under threat by military authorities of severe punishment if they revealed the truth.

    Why?

    High-ranking American military and civilian officials, including Dean Rusk, former U.S. Secretary of State, and Admiral Thomas Moorer, former Chairman of the Joints Chiefs of Staff, provide authoritative analysis.

    Admiral Moorer has said. “What is so chilling and cold-blooded, of course, is that the Israelis could kill as many Americans as they did in confidence that Washington would cooperate in quelling any public outcry. I have to conclude that it was Israel’s intent to sink the Liberty and leave as few survivors as possible.”

    Who in Washington would allow this and why?

    “Israel’s premeditated, sneak attack, on the USS Liberty was a direct attack on America,” says Phillip Tourney, a crewman wounded in the attack. He was awarded the Bronze Star for his heroism under fire.

    Tourney said, “the disgraceful refusal of unpatriotic American governmental officials of dubious allegiance to defend America and come to the aid of brave Americans under attack can only be characterized as treasonous.”

    So — who controls America?

  • The Duke

    I smell “sainthood” on the horizon

  • http://www.roblogpolitics.blogspot.com RJ

    She has morphed into “Mother Sheehan”

    No, she has not “morphed” into anything.

    The Leftists at “daily kos” have attempted to use her in such a way that she becomes “Mother Sheehan” but they have failed thus far…

  • http://www.roblogpolitics.blogspot.com RJ

    “So — who controls America?”

    Well, it your world, it’s the Jews.

    JEWS!

    JOOOS!!!

  • http://www.roblogpolitics.blogspot.com RJ

    More fun quotes from “Mother Sheehan”:

    “We are not waging a war on terror in this country. We’re waging a war of terror. The biggest terrorist in the world is George W. Bush!”

    “We are waging a nuclear war in Iraq right now. That country is contaminated. It will be contaminated for practically eternity now.”

    “They’re a bunch of fucking hypocrites! And we need to, we just need to rise up…”

    Sounds like a rational, non-partisan person to me…

  • MCH

    Re comment #35 by Bobby (R.J.) Elliott;

    She’s referring to your ilk with the “hypocrite” part in that third quote, Bobby.

  • Shark

    Interesting that RJ et al avoid talking about the essential questions here:

    Why did we go to Iraq?

    What will we gain?

    Why are Americans dying over there?

    Why didn’t the Administration plan for a prolonged occupation against urban guerrilla warfare?

    What will constitute a ‘victory’?

    When will our forces come home?

    Where is their new body armor?

    And best of all:

    Why aren’t you enlisting, RJ?

    TOTAL AMERICAN DEAD (as of 8/17/2005) = 1,858
    TOTAL WMDs FOUND (original “reason” for the invasion) = ZERO

    Leave the poor grieving mother out of it for a moment and…

    Reponde, si vous plait.

    …you fucking right-wing [deleted]

  • MCH

    “Why aren’t you enlisting, RJ?”
    – Shark

    Well Shark, he claims he’s got asthma and is too near-sighted to serve. Which fails to explain why he has NOT even ATTEMPTED to enlist, considering his bellicose pro-war rants.

  • RKC

    Answers to the essential questions:

    Why did we go to Iraq?

    Because Saddam was paying Palestinian families for houses that were bulldozed and Sharon had enough of that.

    What will we gain?

    The gratitude of Sharon and his Likud party.

    Why are Americans dying over there?

    Because Israel could not do the job and we had to do it for them.

    Why didn’t the Administration plan for a prolonged occupation against urban guerrilla warfare?

    Pure stupidity on the part of the neo-cons.

    What will constitute a ‘victory’?

    When we declare it and leave.

    When will our forces come home?

    When enough Americans wake up to the sham.

    Where is their new body armor?

    Who the hell knows.

    Why isn’t RJ enlisting?

    Because he can rely on someone else — and has a yellow streak down his back.

  • http://sussfr.blogspot.com Matthew T. Sussman

    Threads/comments like this will surely bring the world together.

    Spite < ------> Spite

  • Shark

    Sussman, if you don’t like the tone of the political area of Blogcritics, why don’t you head over to the Silly Pasttime section and review a fucking baseball game?

    We’re at war.

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    RKC, for a person who asks so many questions you sure have some stupid answers to them.

    >>Why did we go to Iraq?

    Because Saddam was paying Palestinian families for houses that were bulldozed and Sharon had enough of that.< <

    If anything in Israel was a cause it was because Saddam was paying $25,000 a head to the families of suicide bombers - or did you conveniently forget about his role as a sponsor of terrorism.

    >>What will we gain?

    The gratitude of Sharon and his Likud party.< <

    Ridiculous. They have to toady to us no matter what we do.

    >>Why are Americans dying over there?

    Because Israel could not do the job and we had to do it for them.< <

    Israel has already proven itself more than capable of taking on Iraq.

    >>Why didn’t the Administration plan for a prolonged occupation against urban guerrilla warfare?

    Pure stupidity on the part of the neo-cons.< <

    OMG you got one right. Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.

    >>What will constitute a ‘victory’?

    When we declare it and leave.< <

    A total cop-out of an answer.

    >>When will our forces come home?

    When enough Americans wake up to the sham.< <

    By that you mean when you've bitched and whined and lied enough to convince a bunch of ignorant people to go along with your sad defeatist rhetoric?

    >>Where is their new body armor?

    Who the hell knows.< <

    Interestingly most of us do know where it is. And this is a classic lie straight out of the talking points. In fact, everyone has current generation body armor. The holdup is with next generation body armor which wasn't available at the time the war started and is being deployed as quickly as it can given the limited number of factories and the fact that making it is virtually a cottage industry.

    >>Why isn’t RJ enlisting?

    Because he can rely on someone else — and has a yellow streak down his back.<<

    No, because it’s a free country – at least so long as you aren’t in charge – and he doesn’t have to and guess what, the Constitution says he has the right to talk even if he isn’t in the military or a vet. Not that you give a rat’s ass about our constitutional rights.

    Dave

  • ss

    RKC:
    I think Sharon’s been more worried about Arafat than Hussien since 1991.
    Sharon just couldn’t honor an agreement Arafat had signed, so Sharon (in my opinion) delibaretly provoked in incident that lead to an infintada
    that let Sharon scrap earlier agreements.
    By the time we invaded Iraq in ’03, Sadam’s support of H/H/IJ was more like good PR fodder in the US than a the main worry of Sharon.
    It was Arafat’s death got a solution going in Palestine. (Hopefully)

  • http://www.bobbogdal.com Bob Blogdal

    We went to war in Iraq to stop Saddam from being normalized in the EU community, France , Germany and Russia were getting there oil from Iraq, we are in a trade war and losing badly with Europe. So as a means to strong arm the EU into trade negotiations we took the oil out from under those nations, In the mean time Halliburton is sucking Iraq dry and reselling the oil on the open market and stashing some in our reserves. Bush did not want Saddam to be normalized, another few months and he would of been untouchable by America. Halliburton and the oil companies are in this to their eyeballs. We now face what we tried to avoid with Saddam is happening in Iran the EU and UN are normalizing the relationship with t Iran making any future move by America very difficult. Everything you are witnessing fron m the rising oil prices, to the removal of car gas mileage standards are a carefully crafted ploy to increase the wealth of the Saudis, Halliburton, Cheney and their cronies. Now just because I mentined one reason we went into Iraq it is not the only reason, we have been duped by the Saudis to do their dirty work and eliminate the threat of Bin Ladin who is revered in Saudi Arabia, the Saudi princes are on the other hand looked down upon as westernized and decadent. lastly no matter how much it hurts to hear the truth Americas policies are at the heart of the matter, we use up 60% of the worlds resources and flip the bird at any one who does not like it, in the meantime we manipulate and stack the cards in our favor and rape and ruin countries at will. By backing out of Gaza Israel has opened itself up for future attacks in another area of the terrorists choosing. we are now in the begining of a very long war that will most likely cover the next few decades. lets all wait and see how long it takes us to go into South America now to secure the oil there for the United States, South America is Americas last hope to create markets to sell our swag, we have special ops troops in virtually every South American country under the guise of the DEA, they are poised and ready to defend whatever is in our interest down there as South America is our last resort to create stability in our economy, in a frustrating time when we are being pushed out of trade around the world. Yes Jihad exists, but we did bring it on ourselves, from sending woman to try to disrupt their culture with feminist nonsense, or manipulating the region, our relationship with Israel, and our relationship with the Saudis Princes all add to the tradgedy.

  • http://toddyarling.com todd

    What’s this crap that racists are firmly entrenched at the very tops of the Republican Party?

    I don’t think it is possible to hate the Republicans more than I do, but lets hate them for reasons that are somewhere within the bounds of reality.

    David Duke is not a member of the RNC leadership, as you imply.

    Being against affirmative action does not make you a racist, my friend. Nor does being against gay marriage mean you want to start throwing all the gays in concentration camps.

    This is doing the same thing that the RNC mouthpieces are doing to Mrs. Sheehan, calling her a hater for spurious reasons..

    The DNC has its own credibility gap when it starts talking trash like this and you do it just so you can avoid talking about real issues.

  • http://www.bobbogdal.com Bob Blogdal

    Why didn’t America plan on the guerilla warfare: I tell you they did plan on it in fact anyone who has served in the military can see by how the war is, and was being handled actually helped prolong the theater. example: when we were preparing to go into Fallujah, for two weeks previous to surrounding it, it was leaked to the media, and everyday Rumsfeld would telegraph the move during his press time. This is called telegraphing your move, and has only one purpose, to allow the insurgents time to move on to fight another day. The same is so when the generals tell you how many troops you need, and instead you cut the force in half,prolonging the ground war. Why, because we are taking out as much oil every day as tankers can handle aprox. 1.5 million barrels a day, when Bush is done they will be lucky to have much resources left, all this does not bother me to much – Saddam sucked anyway, and if Bush was honest about all this and the real reasons Americans I believe would have backed him and stood by him better, instead he tried to link Iraq to El Qeada and it hurt him in the end. Lastly that is why the Saudis in the begining of the war dropped oil production by a few million barrels a day, to make a statement that they were onto the fact that Halliburton was sucking iraq dry. The main point here is that the war has been purposefully dragged on to perpetuate a better crafted plan than people imagine, unfortuneatly the cost for us sucking Iraq dry is paid with our young men and woman. The sad thing is now as a direct result of the addition of Iraq into the equation is that we are now virtually in a crusade type situation against 1.4 billion people vs 285 million I hope we are a gambling people, because the odds are stacked pretty high, Bush rolled the dice now we have to see if luck is on his side. Frankly with his business record I would say he does not make the correct decision often, so we all better hang on for the long haul.

  • http://www.bobbogdal.com Bob Blogdal

    Todd sorry but what was mentioned about the ingrained racism of the right wing is well documented and has strong historical reference as well. The current republican party is an evolution of the Federalist party which was abolished, at the time many of the Federalist formed the Republican party. There is no question the above mentioned senior republicans have a racist twist to them. It is not there fault they are what they are and they represent the white establishment and socially Republicans are very threatened by the world at large, instead of seeing itself as socially out of step with the world and modern society , they instead embrace their ideology as a self rightious banner and decree to attack differing ideologies in the name of god. I am all for God, but he does not appoint many men to do his bidding and judgement, this is best left for the great Architect to decide, and I do not mean, Frank Lloyd Wright .

  • MCH

    “No, because its a free country…and he doesn’t have to and guess what, according to the Constitution says he (RJ “Bobby” Elliott) has a right to talk, even if he isn’t in the military or a vet.”
    – Dave Nalle

    This is true Nalle, but people usually have more respect for someone who puts their money where their mouth is. Bobby (RJ) Elliott claims the reason he won’t serve is because he has trouble breathing and seeing, and yet he has never even tried to enlist. If you vociferously promote the invasion of another country (and mock anyone opposed to the war) but are content to let others go over and die in that effort, while safely staying home, all the macho war-speak is just pure rhetoric.

    And for those of us who view that kind of person (like Bobby Elliott, Al Barger and yourself) as a phoney and a hypocrite, than that would be our Constitutional right, also.

  • RKC

    Bobby (RJ) Elliott claims the reason he won’t serve is because he has trouble breathing and seeing.

    This would keep someone out of the military only if complaints were made during an induction physical.

    When I went into the military I was asked if certain problems bothered me. I said no because I did not want to fail the physical.

    Give it another try, RJ.

  • Gene

    Believing that Israel should give up its land to reduce terrorism is similar to offering Hitler all of France just so he would leave everyone else in peace. Appeasing terrorists never helps the terrorized, it only emboldens the criminals. Another thing – this Jew didn’t vote for Kerry, he voted for Bush. This was precisely because voting for Kerry would support the world-view of terrorist appeasement. How about ‘Free Israel’ as the slogan instead of free palestine (a fictitious place created by the Romans)? Why not ask for freedom for all Hobbits while you’re at it? Cindy Sheehan is just an emotionally disturbed person, which is understandable after having lost a child, but which is unforgivable when the arena becomes global and easily exploitable by the left fringe.

  • billy

    “Believing that Israel should give up its land to reduce terrorism is similar to offering Hitler all of France just so he would leave everyone else in peace.”

    So then why did you vote for Bush when his position is for Israel to withdraw from Gaza to help appease Palestine?

    Are you blind or just a raging hypocrite? Now wonder you are in the radical minority of Jews, you have no sense at all.

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    >>Dave, OK, I’ll jump back into my “knee-jerk liberalism” from here on out. Sorry you are dizzy, but not everything Bush does is an executable offense. In some ways Bush to me is like inspector gadget. every once in a while he does something right, although its invariably for the wrong reasons.<<

    You’re forgetting the times he does the wrong thing for the right reasons.

    Dave

  • JR

    Gene: Believing that Israel should give up its land to reduce terrorism is similar to offering Hitler all of France just so he would leave everyone else in peace.

    Or it could be like asking France to stay out of the Rhineland to prevent German resentment and the rise of Hitler.

  • RKC

    RJ�

    THE FIRST STEP IN SUPPORTING THE WAR IN IRAQ IS TO ENLIST

    Army recruiters are ready with the know-how to answer questions you have about the U.S. Army. And they�re right around your neighborhood.

    Enter your zip code to find the U.S. Army recruiting office near you.

    Your Zip Code:

    ____________

    If you are a U.S. citizen living overseas, select one of the countries below to email your local overseas recruiter.
    Europe
    Korea
    Japan
    Guam
    Samoa

    Now there is no excuse for not putting YOUR ass on the line.

    Go for it!

  • RKC

    The above also applies to all the other “chickenhawks”.

  • billy

    RKC, you said you voted for bush, when and why? what has changed your mind about him?

  • RKC

    RE: Comment 56

    I did vote for Bush, in 2000. I did not vote for him in 2004 because of his idiotic Iraq War. As a conservative, I could not vote for Kerry because of what he would bring along with him, but I had more respect for the man.

    So I wrote in my alternate candidate.

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    Damn, RKC, why didn’t you vote for Mike Badnarik like me?

    Dave

  • RKC

    And I thought Dave Nalle approved of the idiotic Iraq War.

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    No, RKC. If you read my statements I’ve never approved of war as a method of solving this particular problem. I’d much rather have found a different solution. But since our administation chose war – and there’s an argument to at least be made for it – we’re stuck with it. This is not a situation where you can change strategies all of a sudden and not utterly screw yourself in the process.

    So since war is our course, my belief is that it ought to be done right and pursued to a beneficial conclusion for all the parties involved, except the terrorists.

    Dave

  • http://musical-guru.blogspot.com Michael J. West

    Re: Comment 44:

    Now just because I mentined one reason we went into Iraq it is not the only reason, we have been duped by the Saudis to do their dirty work and eliminate the threat of Bin Ladin who is revered in Saudi Arabia

    Um…yeah, Bob. The Saudis “duped” us into eliminating bin Laden. I mean, after all, what possible reason could AMERICANS have for considering him a threat and wanting to eliminate him?

  • RKC

    RE: Comment 60

    “But since our administation chose war – and there’s an argument to at least be made for it – we’re stuck with it. This is not a situation where you can change strategies all of a sudden and not utterly screw yourself in the process.”

    Did this also apply to the Vietnam War? What did we gain by staying in Vietnam after 1968?

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    >>Did this also apply to the Vietnam War? What did we gain by staying in Vietnam after 1968?<<

    I already wrote an extensive article on exactly this topic. In a nutshell, the reasons for going into Vietnam were real, but the threat was ultimately not large enough to justify the cost paid, so it was better to get out. The threat posed by Islamic extremism and terrorism is ultimately much greater and more direct than the threat of a few countries subverting their neighbors and going communist in an area thousands of miles from the US.

    Not every war is the same in why and how it’s fought, and every war is certainly not a replay of Vietnam.

    Dave

  • RKC

    RE: Comment 63

    “In a nutshell, the reasons for going into Vietnam were real, but the threat was ultimately not large enough to justify the cost paid, so it was better to get out.”

    Bullshit.

    We got out because we were not winning — just like we are not winning in Iraq.

    “The threat posed by Islamic extremism and terrorism is ultimately much greater and more direct than the threat of a few countries subverting their neighbors and going communist in an area thousands of miles from the US.”

    Bullshit.

    What drew us into the Vietnam War was the manufactured “threat” that if Vietnam fell to the Communists, all of Southeast Asia would follow. Just like the manufactured “threat” today is if we do not take a stand in Iraq, all of the Middle East will follow.

    “Not every war is the same in why and how it’s fought, and every war is certainly not a replay of Vietnam.”

    No shit.

    Did you learn that in the war daddy? What war was that? Or were you a member of an armchair brigade?

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    RKC, I was a member of the early-teen brigade during Vietnam. Sorry for not getting a fake ID and volunteering.

    As for your cries of ‘bullshit’, they have no substance to them and they show a complete lack of understanding of the differences between the two wars. I’ve studied the Vietnam conflict in some depth, and as a historian I can tell you that the root strategic reasons for the war were ultimately proven not to be valid. That is not – as yet – the case in Iraq.

    Yes, we did leave Vietnam because we were losing, but the fact remains that a loss in Vietnam was something we could run out on because ultimately the war wasn’t really of the strategic importance we thought it was. Should we have run out on our allies in WW2 when we started taking some casualties? It certainly wasn’t the same as Vietnam, and neither is Iraq from a strategic perspective.

    Dave

  • RKC`

    RE: Comment 65

    The Vietnam War went on for over 10 years, Sorry you missed all of it.

    Your simple-minded saying that my conclusions on war have no substance makes you a pedantic, narcissistic bore.

    Yes — We got out of Vietnam because we were not winning — just like we are not winning in Iraq.

    What drew us into the Vietnam War and what drew us into the Iraq war have a common thread — flagrant lies out of Washington. However, the current lies are much more egregious.

    And bringing up WWII in this comparison is absurd. There is no commonality.

    Your question — “Should we have run out on our allies in WW2 when we started taking some casualties? — is changing the subject.

    You have a flair for trying to confuse an issue.

  • Jon

    What an eloquent mouthpiece for the anti-Bush camp. I’d like to see a Dean-Sheehan ticket in 2008. Dean can wear a kafiya and champion tolerance and dhimmitude and Sheehan can neatly pin all America’s and the world’s problems on da Jooooz. Hey, it couldn’t do any worse than Kerry’s campaign. The Democrats keep reaching new levels of stupidity and irrelevance. The crazy thing is they could have won the last election. It’s not like people thought Bush was doing such an amazing job. The problem is in being so anti-republican the Left sold out their integrity and chose the opposite of every position even if it made no sense. Like their position on Iraq and national security in general. All you needed was one charismatic hawk and the country would be yours but you didn’t and still don’t have the brains to get that. The only dem that made any sense, and communicated genuine concern for this country, was Lieberman. But he’s, of course, a jooo so he never had a chance. The rest came across as brats more interested in their own ambitions than the country’s needs. And as the results showed, America saw through that. It is amazing to me that none of you can. And therefore you won’t have much chance in 2008 either. But hey, I think you guys are happier being bitter anyway. It’s so much easier than actually trying to solve problems.

  • Mike

    Whoever wrote this blog is a complete idiot. Give Washington D.C. to al qaeda and this will lead to a reduction of terror! By your standards, this would be logical!

    Israel left the gaza strip to secure the west bank and Jerusalem while throwing the ball on the palestinian terrorists hands…. get used to it because this is probably as far as things will go! Let’s see how the palestinian “government” handles and controls their animals… I mean people.

    While sheehan may not be an “anti-semite” per say, she is definitely blindly supporting (maybe unknowingly) the position of terror organizations and entities that have been murdering innocent, including the people who killed her son. Absolutely hillarious! There can be no argument there!

    Furthermore, there are MANY people who have lost their loved ones and completely disagree with sheehan. As a matter of fact, they feel as though sheehan has belittled their loved one’s sacrafices. While I feel for her loss, she is trampling on everyone else that has lost somebody.

    Everytime sheehan is shown on TV she has a big huge smile on her face… she’s a pig by any standard!

  • Mark the Sane and Sensible

    Thank you,, Mike, you are correct on all counts. Very well said. Cindy Sheehan is an opportunist and forgets that there was time in this country when common folk grieved and conducted their affairs privately and discreetly. She exhibits no class or sensibility regarding the sacrifice of others. She is a useful idiot of the anti-war crowd of whom I wish a lifetime of pain and suffering for the problems she is causing this country. Her turning her unfortunate circumstance into a grave public spectacle only galvanizes the resolve of our enemies. All anti-war protest does.

  • Mark the Sane and Sensible

    “Yes — We got out of Vietnam because we were not winning — just like we are not winning in Iraq.”

    RKC is yet another America hating puke who confuses facts with fiction, kind of like Howard Zinn’s books on history.

    We got out of Vietnam because the fifth columnists in the press successfully won the hearts and minds of the American public with their own lies starting in 1968 with that moron Walter Cronkite. Their effort to have America cut and run from Vietnam was tied to their crusade to bring down the Nixon presidency. The Big Lie of the mainstream press press was not to disclose that if Vietnam fell to the Communists there would be a mass and unprecedented butchering of lives. Of course, that’s exactly what happened, but the press didn’t talk about that too much. Noam Chumpsky went on record in 1976 singing the praises of the biggest Communist butcher of them all, Pol Pot.

    I know, I lived during those days, unlike most of you bloggers who only know what you’ve read from revisionists and America haters like Howard Zinn and Chumpsky.

    Had we not feared Cold War escalation, we could have easily nuked N. Vietnam and been done with it. Since we couldn’t, we had to restrict ourselves to conventional air and ground war, which was found to be unsuitable in dense jungle areas. The politics of the Cold War had to be played out and the chessboard was Vietnam. What a pity we couldn’t have shown a unified front but no, the counterculture ingrates and their fellow travellers on the college campuses and in the press ensured that wasn’t going to happen.

    It was at that point after 1975 that I refused to ever again trust mainstream journalists who subscribe to a leftist agenda of anti-authoritarianism and egalitarianism. I would sooner trust an elected official as anyone, because I can help to vote them out if they aren’t doing their job. I can’t vote out the Walter Cronkites or the Dan Rathers or the likes of a Peter jennings. I have to wait until they retire, are fired, or when they die.

  • godoggo

    Thank you for saying this. It makes me sick to my stomach the way fascist types cynically throw around the “anti-semite” slur. I recall once seeing Nalle press a commenter to admit he was a Holocaust denier because he’d made the sorts of comments about Zionism that you’re likely to find on the opinion pages of HaAretz.

    For what it’s worth, I find Sheehan’s comment that her son had died to protect Israel a bit silly. But the suggestion that it’s anti-Semitic is a bunch of shit.

    And one other thought: if you want to see some really vile anti-Semitism, check out the ideology of the apocalyptic Christians who have been so supportive of the Zionist project.

  • Mark the Sane and Sensible

    The world is full of Jew haters, godoggo, and any slam on Israel during these tense times can easily be construed in that direction and rightly so. That country is fighting for its survival like never before. This travesty in gaza is just one example of how the country is being sold out to muslim extremism.

  • godoggo

    Last comment, because this will obviously get no-where; however, “That country is fighting for its survival like never before” is pretty clearly untrue to anyone who takes a cursory look at its history.

  • godoggo

    OK, last last comment, just to clarify my previous last comment: however dangerous it may be for individuals living there, Israel as a nation is not in any particular danger at this point, assuming, of course, that terrorists get their hands on some atom bombs. As to what policies would make that more or less likely, well, you’ve heard it all before, and presumeable have your mind made up.

  • godoggo

    Visualize the word “don’t” betwixt “terrorists” and “get.”

    There ya go.

  • Mark the Sane and Sensible

    godoggo, what you say here sounds nonsensical from the average citizen’s standpoint, because anyone from any country is going to be first concerned with their personal safety (as well they should):

    “however dangerous it may be for individuals living there, Israel as a nation is not in any particular danger at this point,”

    Your not looking at it from the average citizen’s perspective first. You’re taking a broadly impartial national view which is puzzling.

    Israelis are marginally safer because the US deposed Hussein, but there is still the PA, Hezbollah, and Hamas still out there.

  • http://www.goddess.org Elder

    I am surprised that the clever conspiracy theorists here haven’t figured out that Vietnam was also a Jewish plot. We DO control the world. Bush IS jumping through hoops to placate Sharon. The Jewish cabal controls everything. Including David Duke… but then again, you could figure this out on your own, surely?

  • Jas

    Israel is a racist, criminal apartheid state. It’s been that way since its creation, and it’s never going to change on its own.

    It’s time there was a referendum in the U.S. on Israel. Let’s let the American public decide on American foreign and support for Israel.

    Jas

  • http://jcb.pentex-net.com John Bambenek

    Nothing gets the anti-war kooks riled up more than Israel. They’re just pissed because Hitler didn’t finish the job.

  • Shark

    Bambineck elevates an already sleazy series of comments:

    “Nothing gets the anti-war kooks riled up more than Israel. They’re just pissed because Hitler didn’t finish the job.”

    And speaking of “kooks”…

    It’s hard to find a more vulgar and obnoxious comment in all the annals of Blogcritics. I’ve been here going on two years, but this one takes the cake.

    Way ta go, John C. A. Bambenek!

  • MCH

    Bambi,
    I’m curious. Have you ever served in the regular miltary, ie, boot camp, active duty, etc.?

  • Shark

    Ask Bambineck about being an altar boy; I have a feeling that early experiences in the church might account for his current… um… um… attitudes.

  • http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/08/17/151908.php#comments Gina

    Just to let you know.. http://www.aljazeera.com has put up part of this article, They make it sound a bit different than you intended I think.

  • wellread

    To all you morons who don’t know the history of Israel. I encourage you to do your damn homework. By the way i’ve read all your heroes. Chomsky, (who by the way wrote the forward to a book that denies the holocaust, Said, Zinn, Finkelstein) at least know the facts before you start tooting out of your backside. And if you want a good argument against your retarded ones read Dershowitz’s, “A case for Israel” you might find it compelling.

    PALESTINIANS ARE FIGHTING FOR LAND THEY LOST IN A WAR THEY STARTED.

    If Cindy did say that, she is indeed an anti-semite. If she didn’t then she isn’t.

  • http://livefromblogdahd.blogspot.com/ demabloggery

    aljazeera.com is NOT the somewhat respected news organization out of Qatar, it is a pro-terrorist site masquerading as such. The aljazeera.net is the actual website.

%d bloggers like this: