Twinks Video Collection.
Way to go Chalien!! Excellent post!! Exactly, Exactly, Exactly. Thank you.
actually, very simple minded. Dissent right up to the first shot being fired is very american and patriotic. After the troops are committed, protest is not only unpatriotic but actually works to prolong conflicts.
Simple minded, but what a fantastic point with so few words.
Again, way overblown. The point is, in america, protest during war is only tacky and unpatriotic. People do not get fed into wood pulpers here for dissent as they are in Iraq. :(
Our soldiers are already putting their lives on the line for our right of dissent, do we really want more of them to die?
James- I disagree! I think it unpatriotic to *NOT* protest if one feels the nation is headed in the wrong direction.And so far as your reference to "wood pulpers' and "dissent" is concerned; I've not read "Patriot Act II" so I don't know for sure what you say is true in the future. I do know I find it rather fearful that congress is even considering it's passage.Much of it will be ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court I suspect, but not till after much suffering by otherwise law abiding citizens of this great nation.charlieps. thank you very much for your most kind comments Karen Brown, it's appreciated. How's Bud by the way, haven't seen much ov him here lately.
Doug Thomas- of course I don't want more of our soldiers to die, I didn't want any to die in the first place. That's why I've opposed this from the beginning.And wouldn't I be doing a disservice to those fighting for my right to dissent if I didn't exercise that right?charlie
quote:Originally posted by George:
[b]If the government tries to take action against you for your opinion, I'll be there to defend you...
George, you're a gentleman. And I'm going to keep your card on file.
As free Americans, we are free to agree or disagree with each other, and/or our government. It's no accident that this God-given right is spelled out in the First Amendment.The problem is: the people protesting at this point are like dogs chasing their tails... wanting to preserve the power of a man who would KILL any of his own people who took similar actions in [i]their[/i] streets.
It's very simple -- Why don't you get it? Saddam has lied to the world and spit in our faces for 13 years... and the liberals and France want to trust him just a little bit longer???Good thinking![ 03-27-2003: Message edited by: Martin ]
charlien:And lampooning, characterizing, making fun of, criticizing, and otherwise raining on YOUR parade for what I regard as stupid, evil, wrongheaded or simply misguided is also MY GOD GIVEN RIGHT!!!!!!!!Don't think a bunch of pinko ALF/ELF anarcho cryptocommiefag cheese-eating surrendermoneyophiles can get a pass on my private scorn, so that they can feel more "free" to exercise theirs.You may not give a bleep about my feelings, you anarchists who die-in and obstruct my travel in NYC, and I don't give a bleep about yours, either. I REFUSE to make it easier for you to be idiots.Charlien -- it works both ways. You are free to spit on my flag -- if you want to. I likewise am free to wipe my butt with Alec Baldwin's or Jacques Chirac's image -- if I feel like it.The thing that gets my goat is the Hollywood elite trying to have the tables turned. They are writing to studios and threatening them if the studios react to the economic pressures caused by people like me, who REFUSE to line the pockets of those they despise.Charlien, you have a right not to be robbed, cheated or prevented from speaking your mind. You do NOT have a right to be liked, respected, or taken seriously. The left is very comfortable being the cartoon thug who takes the swipe -- and they have been for years.
The men and women of our Armed Forces will continue to risk their lives to guarantee the freedoms of the folks that spit/burn the flag....What will they do to deserve it?
quote:Posted by charlien And wouldn't I be doing a disservice to those fighting for my right to dissent if I didn't exercise that right?
No you would be doing them a great service. In fact by not providing aid and comfort to the enemy you might even save some of our troops lives.
What a GREAT political cartoon..! Masterful.
Charlien:History has proven that the anti-war demonstrations during the Vietnam War actually prolonged the war. This resulted in more casualities on both sides of the conflict. A number of leaders from Vietnam have indicated that they were close to defeat but felt that if they could just hold on long enough the American public would ultimately turn against the war. You do have a right to dissent all you want, but you should not be surprised when you are criticized for your position. I believe that your actions are dangerous to our troops, and ultimately innocent Iraqi citizens. You can wrap yourself in the flag all you want, but that does not make you patriotic. By defination, you are giving aide and comfort to the enemy. You should thank God that you live in a country that allows you to do so. Why can't you just save your criticism and analysis until after the conflict is over? If there is even a slight chance that your position could, in fact, put people at greater risk, why would you risk it? Al
:confused: :confused: :confused:
Anti-war Protestors: It's Time YOU
Start Imitating Our Troops!
By Lisa S. DeanWhen it comes to supporting freedom of speech, I'm right there fighting with
the next guy. But as with anything, there are limits to what freedom of
speech can tolerate.
In San Francisco last week, protesters rallied carrying a banner reading,
"We Support Our Troops Who Shoot Their Officers." Now, moronic slogans such
as "Bush is Hitler" and "Uncle Sam is a Terrorist" are tolerated because we,
as a nation, support the right for even the dumbest of our citizens to
publicly dissent. That's what democracy is all about, or so they say.
But that banner isn't expressing dissent and it's not freedom of speech.
It's supporting sedition and is downright treasonous.
In an attempt to calm the fury of patriots who wanted to rip these
protesters in two, an apparently soft-hearted resident of San Francisco
rationally explained where these protestors were coming from. He opined
that they have fallen on hard times because of the dot.com failures and are
lashing out at anything in order to vent their frustration. Nice try but NO
SALE! You mean to say that someone can act irresponsibly, even going so far
as to put the lives of others at risk, just because you are throwing a
temper tantrum over your miserable, sorry life? I don't think so.
Look, whatever you may think about this war, remember that these men and
women are serving their nation and as a citizen of their nation, they are
serving YOU. They are putting their lives at risk FOR YOU. They aren't
doing this for publicity, or for some other self-serving reason, they are
doing it FOR YOU. And in case you didn't hear me, let me say it again, THEY
ARE RISKING THEIR LIVES FOR YOU!
So instead of insulting them, why not try imitating them? Skip Starbucks,
throw down your protest banners and go help out in a soup kitchen. Go
mentor a needy child. Go do something thoughtful for a family who has a
loved one in Iraq right now. In other words, go and do something other than
sitting around feeling sorry for yourself and taking out your self-pity on a
society that you think owes you the comfortable lifestyle to which you have
become accustomed. Spend some time contributing something to the country by
serving somebody else, just like our troops.
quote:Originally posted by Al Greenlaw:
[b]History has proven that the anti-war demonstrations during the Vietnam War actually prolonged the war. This resulted in more casualities on both sides of the conflict.[/b]
History has better shown that Henry Kissinger, by suggesting to the North Vietnamese that they would find better terms from Nixon, singlehandedly sabotaged the Paris peace agreement in 1968 and then settled three years later for the same terms. Without him, the Vietnam Memorial would be half as long.
quote:Originally posted by charlien:
And so far as your reference to "wood pulpers' and "dissent" is concerned; I've not read "Patriot Act II" so I don't know for sure what you say is true in the future. I do know I find it rather fearful that congress is even considering it's passage.QB]
I also do not like the patriots act BUT the left has left us with no other choice. If we target the real sources of terror, Islamic men, we are immediatly branded racist and the process is called racial profiling. So...we strip search grannies at the airport for no reason at all other than to provide cover for looking at those who just might be terrorists.We make life very hard for the vast majority of citizens to avoid making life hard for the groups that are really a threat.Stupid, ineffectual, expensive,but liberal.Also, about every constitutional dodge required to eneact the first Patriots act were developed by the left to legislate from the bench and work around the constitution. Remember, you do not hear conservatives loudly proclaiming the constitution as a"living" document to be interpreted by any tame judge one can find.No, the left gave us the road to the patriots act. Noiw they whine about the direction this road is taking us. I have littel sympathy. :roll:
By Scott Stantis, The Birmingham (Ala.) News, for USA TODAY, March 25
Charlien, Bud has been to Augusta a couple of times over the past few weeks for hearings and is writing a couple of letters to the editors for local papers.
Interesting how those who were most vehement we should invade Iraq blame the deaths of our soldiers on those who never wanted to invade. Interesting how those who have spoken in public meetings stating we should pull out of the UN, use Hussein's lack of response to the UN's resolutions as an excuse to invade. Guess the US should pull out but the rest of the world should kowtow to the UN. Interesting how otherwise intelligent people cannot distinguish the difference between not wanting to invade Iraq and not supporting Hussein. Interesting that some feel we have the right to invade Iraq because they invaded Kuwait, yet Iraq never invaded the US. Interesting that the only way to be patriotic today is to support a war based on maybe's and might have's.
When the word "dissenter" is used on AMG, is it referring to anarchists and violent demonstrators or people who don't believe we should be in Iraq but don't demonstrate against the war in public or those who demonstrate peacefully?
What, no comment concerning simple minded regarding Scott's cartoon James?charlie
Karen:Point of clarification: Is it your belief that the USA should [i]only[/i] attack nations [i]after[/i] those nations have attacked the USA?Charlie:Patriotism, by definition, is the defending of one's country. With that in mind, I have no qualms with such patriots dissenting US foreign policy.As for dissenters who, by their statements, signs, and actions, hate the USA -- they aren't patriots. If hating the USA and being a patriot are synonymous -- the 9/11 hijackers were patriots.skf
Dissent my be a right, but I'm hard pressed to consider the majority of those engaging in it so far "patriotic:" [b] Feeling, expressing, or inspired by love for one's country.Excerpted from The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Third Edition Copyright © 1992 by Houghton Mifflin Company. [/b]And obstruction, vandalism, and lawlessness are definitely not a right, and definitely not patriotic under our system. To be sure, there are those peacefully protesting out of love of country. But they are being encouraged to upscale their level of defiance and overall rowdiness. And diverting public officials from homeland security obligations is clearly and patently unpatriotic. No ifs, ands or buts. It is their intent, I am sure.As many have said, you have the right to speak in dissent; you do not have a right to be heard, and you do not have a right to be considered right for doing what you do. You do not have a right to interfere with others as they go about their daily exercise in personal freedom, and you don't have the right to damage public or personal property, unless it's your own.A lot of what these so-called dissenters are doing is like going to a football game, and cheering for your own team to fumble, or not make a first down. You have that right, but don't expect to make friends doing it.I can hear it now:"Fumble, don't rumble.""Stall team, stall; fail, fail, fail."I challenge anyone to compare the behavior and dispositions of the Pro-Troops/Pro-America rallyers with that of the Anti-War dissidents. As shown on cable this morning, the latter are not doing themselves any favors with their activity. A poll shows 63% unhappy with the "peace protesters" and 23% supportive.
By way of clarification, I am saying that those who use Iraq's invasion of Kuwait ten years ago as an excuse or reason, whichever word one prefers, are stretching. Iraq was driven back and Desert Storm ended. To my knowledge, which I will openly admit is rather limited, Iraq has not invaded any other country since that time. When else in history has the US waited ten years to invade a country because that other country did something ten years ago? It is also a huge stretch to blame those who do not want to go war for the deaths of our soldiers. The death of soldiers rest with those who sent them and those who showed up to fight for the other side. Not with me because I didn't want them to go in the first place.
I am saying the arguments being made by people to invade Iraq are a stretch.
Patriotism--feeling, expressing, or inspired by love of one's country. Right on definition but not everyone is going to feel, express or be inspired by love for their country in the same manner. Many feel we can best be patriotic by invading a third world country and expect the world to support us because it is all about us. But one can be patriotic and sincerely love their country and still believe the citizens of other countries are as human as Americans are.
I express my love for my daughters but when they do wrong, I don't just say "Ok, you are my children so whatever you do is fine and I will defend you 100% in all your actions." I still love them and they are mine but they still are wrong when they are wrong. And I don't disown them when they do wrong. It is the same with love of one's country. You can still love your country and still believe your country is not always right. That love it or leave reply is so idiotic and shows the mentality of those who make it as very low. It shows they cannot see another side to an issue except their own because it is all about them and their beliefs.
My brother served two tours in Vietnam. He came home and was spat at and called baby killer. Then he was told he could not join the local VFW because he was not a veteran of a foreign war. He believes he was in a war. Then the draft dodgers were pardoned. His take on going to war in the future is if they come onto US soil he will fight. If he has to leave the US, forget it. So is he un-American, unpatriotic or a traitor or someone who doesn't love his country? I would pay to see someone tell him to his face he was or to make the statement to him to love it or leave it.
How much money has the US sent in foreign aid that has been funneled into funding terrorism? The truth is, I don't know and neither does anyone else. How many of the arms being used against our soldiers were supplied by the US at some point in time?
This sounds like a blame America first rant which it isn't. It is just that people who are so gungho about getting our boys killed should at least take an honest look at America's part in it all first. I love my country and I think it is the greatest country on earth but I can respect people in other countries who feel the same way about theirs.
I can separate the people of this country from the politicians and I can separate the people of other countries from their politicians. If that makes me a traitor, un-American, or unpatriotic, so be it.
Karen[ 03-28-2003: Message edited by: Karen Brown ]
Not to put too fine a point on it, but as I understand it, the first Gulf War did not "end". It went into cease fire status on the basis of an agreement made with Saddam Hussein.I have read that it required him to disarm in 45 days or so. Even if that's off by say, a factor of ten, he clearly did not meet the conditions for the cease fire to remain in effect. So,.....the firing, and the war, have simply "unceased." We just had a long intermission so the theater could be cleaned up, in a manner of speaking.
Karen,I don't have a problem with others that, very rationally, express their dissenting opinions in the manner that you have. But for the dissenters, you are a minority. Just look at the picture in the PPH today with the young man and woman in Monument Square stripped to the waste and bareing their chests for Peace. That's the kind of crap that set's alot of us off. My 14 year old daughter and I disagree about this war and have had some rousing discussions related to it. I respect her, thus, her opinion. I, however, don't respect the morons who are protesting in Portland like the two in todays paper. In turn, I also don't respect the supporters that can't "debate" the issue rationally. Again, the few idiots that go too far on both sides have polorized the issue for all.
I don't think she's in the minority at all. There are plenty of us with grave reservations about how this administration has handled this who are saying little or nothing at all. My own "polls" around the office and such show me that there is not much public support for this war, just hope that it ends soon and doesn't leave things in a bigger mess than we started with.It is easy for me to see how the rest of the world might view this war in a completely different light.
quote:Not to put too fine a point on it, but as I understand it, the first Gulf War did not "end". It went into cease fire status on the basis of an agreement made with Saddam Hussein.
Using that line of reasoning, we could probably justify invading the whole dam world, based on past conflicts. Lets hope that's not what Dubya has in mind.[ 03-28-2003: Message edited by: Randy ]
Randy,I tried to be nice getting my point across but the fact is you are in a 30% minority that doesn't support this military action. You can ask all the opinions you want around the office but 70%+ of Maine people support this cause!
Melvin, I truly wanted to let this go, but please could you clarify one issue? In one of the posts you wrote: "As many have said, you have the right to speak in dissent; you do not have a right to be heard..." Does this mean dissenters have no right to be heard but the assenters do? I have always found your posts to be pretty on target but that statement seems a little off kilter or perhaps I am reading it wrong. Also please know I am not defending in any way any actions that are illegal, menacing or meant to disrupt the lives of others. Just that one statement seemed prejudicial.
Karen I like your analogy of loving your children but maybe not liking their actions and trying to correct it. I am against this war but am not out there protesting. 1)The war is a done deal and a waste of energy, 2) Dissent or not no one has the right to disrupt the public way or cause damage to private or public property. 3) Such actions are counter-productive and people that might be sympathetic to the idea will be turned off by such actions. 4) From experience from the early seventies, a lot of the 'protesters' are bored young people looking for a party. NOT all of course.I believe if you want things to change you need to get involved. Letter's to the Editor and your elected representives in government. Run for office yourself. But do things in a constructive not a destructive or non-productive way.Plus at this point, we have to hope things turn out OK. The war is on. Let it end quickly with the least negative consequences possible and the least amount of death and destruction possible to both the US and Iraq.Thanks to everyone for very interesting ideas and debate.Ed
Ed, Am not sure if your comments about doing something constructive was directed towards me personally or the AMG readers in general. Just for clarification, I have not participated in any demonstrations against the war. I play my part in the political venue but do not let it consume my life. I have participated in rallies with many of the AMG members and have a high regard for most of them. I have found that I do not have the fortitude nor stomach for running for a political office. I do what I can where I am with what I have.
In the 70's during Vietnam, I was a student trying to get through college and work. I was the one who sent cookies to my brother and uncle while they served. In the late 70's, I attended a huge rally against the ERA (remember that Equal Rights Amendment). I attended a rally in Houston Texas at the cow palace with Phyllis Schafly and a young man named Alan Keyes. On the other side of town, there was a pro ERA rally at a very posh hotel with one current and three ex-first ladies present. So, I am pretty much used to being in the minority.
Maine-iac, my daughters have each threatened to disown me at various times. I did not see the article you are referring to, but if I did participate in such a public display I know that would be when both my daughters and my parents would disown me. And rightly so.