Is It Cindy Sheehan's Fault She's An Idiot Misguided?
Oh Cindy Sheehan… What to make of you and your ill-tempered remarks?
Am I emotional? Yes, my first born was murdered. Am I angry? Yes, he was killed for lies and for a PNAC Neo-Con agenda to benefit Israel. My son joined the army to protect America, not Israel.”
While Sheehan claims she did not make the remarks, there is evidence to the contrary. As a result she has, on the one hand, become a whipping-post for the right-wing, and on the other, a champion of the extreme right.
The question is, with assholes like Phil Zelikow shooting his mouth off, Senator Fritz Hollings’ inanity, and even el presidente Bush himself directly linking his “War on Terror” to Israel’s safety — let alone the idiots on the left Sheehan’s taking her cues from — how can this woman be blamed for making such a foolish assertion?
***
Frankly, I would agree with the contention that this war was driven by the PNAC and a neocon agenda. However, Israel is no more than a pawn in this game. The neocon agenda has naught to do with Israel’s security — which as always, is a great cover. This is the same game the Arab world plays, keeping people distracted from the hand in their backpocket and the boot on their neck by pointing at the Jews. The question of the Jewish neocon’s dual allegience is no more than a classic anti-Semitic canard. The neocons are interested in only one thing — securing the continued success of the military and energy industrial complexes which are the backbone of the U.S. economy. In order to maintain the United States’ “global preeminence” as the PNAC calls it, it must remain the global economic leader. Thus, in other words, these folks are just concerned with staying the richest people in the world. The war in Iraq was not fought for ideological purposes, nor for Israel at all. It was fought for the almighty dollar, which is all any war is ever fought for.
See: Cheney’s energy task force meeting notes reveal maps of Iraqi oil fields and lists of potential suitors.
And on that note, two years into the war, speculation about an Iraqi pipeline to Israel has yet to yield any evidence let alone progress in that direction. Not that it wouldn’t be great to see the price of gasoline in Israel drop down from $4.83 per gallon.
“The neocons are interested in only one thing — securing the continued success of the military and energy industrial complexes which are the backbone of the U.S. economy. In order to maintain the United States’ “global preeminence” as the PNAC calls it, it must remain the global economic leader.” As a neocon I’d say thats essentially true: I want my country to be the strongest and most powerful – I’d have thought thats also the goal of every american – is someone out there rooting for us to become mexico?
Amen, Avi. The US interest in Iraq or Israel is basically a nationalist one. The US is served by a stable democracy in Iraq. Similarly, the US was and is served by a stable democracy in Israel (which, by the way was threatened for decades by our cold warrior foes, the Soviets through its Arab puppets). Stable liberal market democracies make people rich, and make their trading partners rich. Rich people (which, btw includes almost all Americans by global standards) tend to abhor war, if only because they have so much to lose. What is wrong with promoting a global society where people are well off and hate war? Unfortunately, war must sometimes be waged to move towards such a global society.
No, we went to war because Saddam had all those weapons of mass destruction…oh wait, nevermind…
Anyway, I don’t know why anyone needs to be reminded, but there are probably an equal number of jewhaters on both sides of the political spectrum. Especially from both extremes. Hitlers and Stalins. Of course, naturally, the hardcore lefty Jews will deny this up and down and the Jewish neocons will do the same.
Oh, and the rising price of gas has little to do with the availability of oil. It has to do with yuppies driving around in behemoth gas guzzlers all day.
Fucking disgusting. Cindy Sheehan lost her son and she’s an idiot for sounder reasoning than anything you’ll see coming from “J”?
Is it the Jews’ fault that they are incapable of tact?
THE QUOTE IS NOT TRUE! I REPEAT THE QUOTE IS NOT TRUE! Cindy Sheehan was interviewed on Anderson Cooper where he asked her about it, and she made it very clear that she never said anything like that (although she does feel the U.S. needs a more balanced Middle East policy.) I’ll provide a link to the transcipt if I can find it.
Oops! I didn’t read the whole article before I commented. I guess I learned a very important lesson. Sorry about that.
I have yet to see a Jew driving an SUV, or a Mercedes, or a BMW
“It was fought for the almighty dollar, which is all any war is ever fought for.” Pfffff…Spanish Civil War, WWII, Israel’s War of Independence…I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you were tired.
The leftists are so funny, whatever the problem can be, they always have a conspiracy to explain it. The war in Irak, first it was for Oil, now it’s for Israel, and i’m sure there has been a lot of other theories among the leftits to explain this war, all, of course, involving worldwide conspiracies led by nasty, ugly people (corporations, jews etc…). I guess it makes them feel smart and/or important, like they know something you don’t know.
Well Mobious you could debunk those claims rather than just engage in namecalling. Bill Mon for instance says it is one reason, not the only one, and he linked to an actual quote by dlc’s Will Marshall who is also a signatory at the PNAC. Anyway, looks to me like alot of those people presented a pretty credible case. I would also say that Zieklow’s comments were straight out of the horses mouth.
Earth to lying dishonest bad arguers:
The idea that Israel was only interested in Iraq for oil is a straw man (and a non-sequitor, since a better oil price really wouldn’t be anything but a convenience).
The idea that Israel could possibly be interested in the weakening of its most viable regional enemy, the last state to get a rocket over its border, and a dictator who in these very pages was hated for paying Palestinian terrorists, is not based on any fanciful (and interestingly mentioned only here) conspiracy, but on what you should’ve learnt in basic middle-school history.
Israel does not like Iraq.
Israel faces many enemies, but among states, Iraq is surely near or at the top.
Now Israel no longer has to worry about Saddam.
Is this a conspiracy theory? Is the publicly boasted loyalty of the neocons to Israel a conspiracy theory? Is it a conspiracy or a matter of record that Dougie “stupidest” Feith passed information to the Israeli embassy?
This is like a US government dominated by a small clique of predominantly Japanese people, some maintaining Japanese passports, and all very passionate about making the world safer for Nihon-koku, goes to war unprovoked against North Korea and anyone who smells something fishy SIMPLY MUST be a racist who wants to murder innocent Japanese people! There is no possibility that advisors who hold high ranking positions might have something to do with the government, that’s just racism!
How long are you going to insist on this indefensible hysteria crap? Oh, never mind me, by suggesting these horrible racist things, I’m Adolf Hitler and only trying to murder innocent people!
Dude, to make a decision like going to war, a government generally needs to unite a broad range of interest, from political perspective, economical perspective, and other considerations (like religion or security for instance) in order to receive enough support.
Did it help israel ? not realy, especially since it allowed Iran to be the dominating power of the region and unveil their nuclear ambition without any real problem. Still, one can surely consider, that, after all, Irak was a problem to israel, and at that time, nobody had realy considered the fact that removing saddam would benefit Iran. But just keep in mind that, even at that time, Irak was less of a problem than countries like Saoudi Arabia or Iran (which were/are actually directly involved in terror activities), and if it had been up to israel, or if the idea had been to benefit israel, the war wouldn’t have happened in Irak, but in one of those countries.
Racism, is not about saying that israel profited of this war, it’s about saying this war was lead to benefit israel, implying it was the sole or dominant consideration for engaging irak. It’s also about implying that israel was the main or only one to benefit from this war, while lots of people/countries/entiti es actually benefitted from this war, and supported this war in regard to the benefit they expected and generally received. Racism is also about the people who once supported this war because they though they could benefit from this war, and then when not having the results they expected, used israel as a scapegoat to cover their own mistakes of judgment.
Conspiracy is about people who are incapable of understanding principles like the Chaos Theory, or basic social interaction systems.
Conspiracy is about people who are incapable of understanding principles like the Chaos Theory, or basic social interaction systems.
Zionists who hear Israel listed as one reason and leap to saying they heard it listed as the only are of course exempt. For decades now, if we came across Ariel Sharon wringing the neck of a Palestinian with his bare hands in broad daylight directly in front of the Knesset, balancing his ID on his forehead, there are people who’d want to know why everyone is always out to get the Jews.
And Cindy Sheehan, far from being a diploma’ed think tank paycheck-receiver qualified to hold forth on the State Department’s latest excuse for murder, is a real American who proves that there is only so much of that hyseria bullshit that people are willing to take. Israel is undeniably a beneficiary, the Neocons are undeniable admitted Zionists — but let’s not have any racist conspiracy theory! And who else here laughed at that bullshit about how war in Bush’s America is a matter of bringing together broad interests — as broad as Bushevik oilmongers and Zionist neocons! Such width! Maybe you can count Condi as “minority interest”! With a prerequisite like that it’s only Sheehan that’s keeping the US out of Venezuela!
Look, guys: we are no longer buying it. Increasing numbers of people are simply not buying it any more, and Sheehan is merely a symptom.
i’m glad to hear there are still some “real americans” like cindy sheehan and (i guess) yourself.
As for hysteria, you seem to know all about it. Get some counselling dude, you’ve lost it.
Cindy is an idiot for not knowing why there is a war?
Maybe if the fucking assclowns running it gave everyone a straight answer she wouldn’t speculate crazy crap like this. It’s got nothing to do with who she’s “taking her cues from.”
“securing the continued success of the military and energy industrial complexes which are the backbone of the U.S. economy.”
I can dig it, but it might not be as obvious to people like Shehan, and 99.9% of Americans, as it is to you. The “leaders” keep changing the reasons for the war all the time and have yet to give us as straight an answer as this.
I’ve really enjoyed reading your stuff for a few months now, here and on your OA site, and this is the first time I feel like I’m reading someone completely different.
Is this whole post some kinda yo-mama joke that you get off on? You’re picking the wrong person to attack here, bub. And noalternative is right, you should skip the ad-hominem bullshit next time and try a little harder debunking the claims. If Billmon’s an idiot, then you’re a retarded vegetable. I actually think you’re both pretty bright, except Billmon would think a little more before hitting the post button if he typed up garbage like this.
Cindy Sheehan lost her son and she’s an idiot for sounder reasoning than anything you’ll see coming from “J”? Is it the Jews’ fault that they are incapable of tact?
How is it sound reasoning to assume that the war in Iraq was fought for Israel? You can say “the war may favor Israel” — but that it was fought for Israel? That’s not reasonable. That’s just plain stupid. And while I empathize with the woman for losing her son, being a grieving mother doesn’t make you correct when making stupid assertions.
Well Mobious you could debunk those claims rather than just engage in namecalling. Bill Mon for instance says it is one reason, not the only one, and he linked to an actual quote by dlc’s Will Marshall who is also a signatory at the PNAC. Anyway, looks to me like alot of those people presented a pretty credible case. I would also say that Zieklow’s comments were straight out of the horses mouth.
I actually linked the Billmon piece to the wrong section and forget the link I intended to put there. Again, saying it could be considered one reason is much different from saying, “My son died for Israel.” That’s just an incendiary remark. And as far as incendiary remarks go, kudos to grieving mom Sheehan for giving Nazis a rallying cry.
The idea that Israel could possibly be interested in the weakening of its most viable regional enemy, the last state to get a rocket over its border, and a dictator who in these very pages was hated for paying Palestinian terrorists, is not based on any fanciful (and interestingly mentioned only here) conspiracy, but on what you should’ve learnt in basic middle-school history. Israel does not like Iraq. Israel faces many enemies, but among states, Iraq is surely near or at the top. Now Israel no longer has to worry about Saddam. Is this a conspiracy theory? Is the publicly boasted loyalty of the neocons to Israel a conspiracy theory? Is it a conspiracy or a matter of record that Dougie “stupidest” Feith passed information to the Israeli embassy?
Once again, Israel may clearly benefit in some ways from the fall of Saddam’s regime, but that does not mean that the Bush administration waged this war in the interest of Israel. To win Jewish votes, Bush could say, “Hey, and Israel will be safer too,” but that doesn’t mean that’s what he’s doing it for.
This is like a US government dominated by a small clique of predominantly Japanese people, some maintaining Japanese passports, and all very passionate about making the world safer for Nihon-koku, goes to war unprovoked against North Korea and anyone who smells something fishy SIMPLY MUST be a racist who wants to murder innocent Japanese people! There is no possibility that advisors who hold high ranking positions might have something to do with the government, that’s just racism!
This implies that the people in the Bush admin will do whatever Israel wants because they’re Zionists and sympathize with Israel. So why are so many Israelis fuming at the Bush administration? Was Bush admin pressure to withdraw from Gaza — a move which will only amplify palestinian violence and bring rocketfire all the closer to Israel’s major population’s centers — favoring Israel? Was creating a hotbed of terrorism in the Middle East favoring Israel? So much so that now we have alleged Iraqi Al Qaeda operatives launching rockets into Israel? Does demanding Israel restrain itself in pursuing terror and demanding Israel arm the Palestinians (once again) favor Israel?
These things all come out of the Bush administration. And these issues are much more vital to Israel’s security than the impending threat of an attack from Iraq. To quote Israeli rapper Subliminal in his interview with the Guardian, “If the Israel army wanted to occupy something, we would occupy the whole Middle East in 48 hours.” Israel took out Iraq’s nuclear reactor — what happened? A few scuds fell on Tel Aviv during the Persian Gulf War a decade later? Big whoop! More people died sealing their houses in plastic than they did from Iraqi weapons. Saddam posed no realistic military threat to Israel. That’s why he opted to give money to families of suicide bombers instead.
Racism, is not about saying that israel profited of this war, it’s about saying this war was lead to benefit israel, implying it was the sole or dominant consideration for engaging irak. It’s also about implying that israel was the main or only one to benefit from this war, while lots of people/countries/entiti es actually benefitted from this war, and supported this war in regard to the benefit they expected and generally received. Racism is also about the people who once supported this war because they though they could benefit from this war, and then when not having the results they expected, used israel as a scapegoat to cover their own mistakes of judgment.
Word to that!
Zionists who hear Israel listed as one reason and leap to saying they heard it listed as the only are of course exempt. For decades now, if we came across Ariel Sharon wringing the neck of a Palestinian with his bare hands in broad daylight directly in front of the Knesset, balancing his ID on his forehead, there are people who’d want to know why everyone is always out to get the Jews.
I won’t argue with that. But I’m not one of those types. Not by a long shot.
Israel is undeniably a beneficiary, the Neocons are undeniable admitted Zionists — but let’s not have any racist conspiracy theory!
Once again, indirect benefit does not equate to a full-fledged reason.
Cindy is an idiot for not knowing why there is a war?
If she says that the war was for Israel, then she doesn’t know why there’s a war.
Maybe if the fucking assclowns running it gave everyone a straight answer she wouldn’t speculate crazy crap like this. […] The “leaders” keep changing the reasons for the war all the time and have yet to give us as straight an answer as this.
Hear, hear! But maybe if Sheehan spent more time reading legitimate sources as opposed WhatReallyHappened.com she could avoid embarassing the entire left-wing she’s become the posterchild of.
Is this whole post some kinda yo-mama joke that you get off on? You’re picking the wrong person to attack here, bub. And noalternative is right, you should skip the ad-hominem bullshit next time and try a little harder debunking the claims. If Billmon’s an idiot, then you’re a retarded vegetable. I actually think you’re both pretty bright, except Billmon would think a little more before hitting the post button if he typed up garbage like this.
Once again: I actually linked the Billmon piece to the wrong section and forget the link I intended to put there.
I’m not attacking the wrong person: Every individual has to take personal responsibility for what comes out of their mouth. I take responsibility for calling her an idiot, even if, in some ways, I regret it now. I can come clean, assume responsibility, and apologize for it, and say it was a ill-tempered remark of my own. I’m not going to lie and say I never wrote those words, like she did.
Well as others have pointed out there is not proof she said it, anyway if she did say it the quote was taken out of context because she also talked about oil.
did you click “evidence to the contrary” in the initial post?