Looking more and more like the '60s. Where's my "Make Love Not War" T-shirt?

tian

Star
Registered
Anti-War Protests Target Wounded at Army Hospital
By Marc Morano
CNSNews.com Senior Staff Writer
August 25, 2005

See Marc Morano's Video Report

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

The anti-war demonstrators, who obtain their protest permits from the Washington, D.C., police department, position themselves directly in front of the main entrance to the Army Medical Center, which is located in northwest D.C., about five miles from the White House.

Among the props used by the protesters are mock caskets, lined up on the sidewalk to represent the death toll in Iraq.

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

Some conservative supporters of the war call the protests, which have been ignored by the establishment media, "shameless" and have taken to conducting counter-demonstrations at Walter Reed. "[The anti-war protesters] should not be demonstrating at a hospital. A hospital is not a suitable location for an anti-war demonstration," said Bill Floyd of the D.C. chapter of FreeRepublic.com, who stood across the street from the anti-war demonstrators on Aug. 19.

"I believe they are tormenting our wounded soldiers and they should just leave them alone," Floyd added.

According to the Walter Reed Army Medical Center, nearly 4,000 individuals involved in the Iraq war were treated at the facility as of March of this year, 1,050 of whom were wounded in battle.

One anti-war protester, who would only identify himself as "Luke," told Cybercast News Service that "the price of George Bush's foreign policy can be seen right here at Walter Reed -- young men who returned from Iraq with their bodies shattered after George Bush sent them to war for a lie."

Luke accused President Bush of "exploiting American soldiers" while "oppressing the other nations of earth." The president "has killed far too many people," he added.

On Aug. 19, as the anti-war protesters chanted slogans such as "George Bush kills American soldiers," Cybercast News Service observed several wounded war veterans entering and departing the gates of Walter Reed, some with prosthetic limbs. Most of the demonstrations have been held on Friday evenings, a popular time for the family members of wounded soldiers to visit the hospital.

But the anti-war activists were unapologetic when asked whether they considered such signs as "Maimed for Lies" offensive to wounded war veterans and their families.

"I am more offended by the fact that many were maimed for life. I am more offended by the fact that they (wounded veterans) have been kept out of the news," said Kevin McCarron, a member of the anti-war group Veterans for Peace.

Kevin Pannell, who was recently treated at Walter Reed and had both legs amputated after an ambush grenade attack near Baghdad in 2004, considers the presence of the anti-war protesters in front of the hospital "distasteful."

When he was a patient at the hospital, Pannell said he initially tried to ignore the anti-war activists camped out in front of Walter Reed, until witnessing something that enraged him.

"We went by there one day and I drove by and [the anti-war protesters] had a bunch of flag-draped coffins laid out on the sidewalk. That, I thought, was probably the most distasteful thing I had ever seen. Ever," Pannell, a member of the Army's First Cavalry Division, told Cybercast News Service.

"You know that 95 percent of the guys in the hospital bed lost guys whenever they got hurt and survivors' guilt is the worst thing you can deal with," Pannell said, adding that other veterans recovering from wounds at Walter Reed share his resentment for the anti-war protesters.

"We don't like them and we don't like the fact that they can hang their signs and stuff on the fence at Walter Reed," he said. "[The wounded veterans] are there to recuperate. Once they get out in the real world, then they can start seeing that stuff (anti-war protests). I mean Walter Reed is a sheltered environment and it needs to stay that way."

McCarron said he dislikes having to resort to such controversial tactics, "but this stuff can't be hidden," he insisted. "The real cost of this war cannot be kept from the American public."

The anti-war protesters claim their presence at the hospital is necessary to publicize the arrivals of newly wounded soldiers from Iraq, who the protesters allege are being smuggled in at night by the Pentagon to avoid media scrutiny. The protesters also argue that the military hospital is the most appropriate place for the demonstrations and that the vigils are designed to ultimately help the wounded veterans.

"If I went to war and lost a leg and then found out from my hospital bed that I had been lied to, that the weapons I was sent to search for never existed, that the person who sent me to war had no plan but to exploit me, exploit the country I was sent to, I would be pretty angry," Luke told Cybercast News Service.

"I would want people to do something about it and if I couldn't get out of my bed and protest myself, I would want someone else to do it in my name," he added.

The conservative counter-demonstrators carry signs reading "Troops out when the job's done," "Thank you U.S. Armed Forces" and "Shameless Pinkos go home." Many wear the orange T-shirts reading "Club G'itmo" that are marketed by conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh.

"[The anti-war protesters] have no business here. If they want to protest policy, they should be at the Capitol, they should be at the White House," said Nina Burke. "The only reason for being here is to talk to [the] wounded and [anti-war protests are] just completely inappropriate."

Albion Wilde concurred, arguing that "it's very easy to pick on the families of the wounded. They are very vulnerable ... I feel disgusted.

"[The anti-war protesters] are really showing an enormous lack of respect for just everything that America has always stood for. They lost the election and now they are really, really angry and so they are picking on the wrong people," Wilde added.

At least one anti-war demonstrator conceded that standing out in front of a military hospital where wounded soldiers and their families are entering and exiting, might not be appropriate.

"Maybe there is a better place to have a protest. I am not sure," said a man holding a sign reading "Stop the War," who declined to be identified.

But Luke and the other anti-war protesters dismissed the message of the counter demonstrators. "We know most of the George Bush supporters have never spent a day in uniform, have never been closer to a battlefield than seeing it through the television screen," Luke said.

Code Pink, the group organizing the anti-war demonstrations in front of the Walter Reed hospital, has a controversial leader and affiliations. As Cybercast News Service previously reported, Code Pink co-founder Medea Benjamin has expressed support for the Communist Viet Cong in Vietnam and the Nicaraguan Sandinistas.

In 2001, Benjamin was asked about anti-war protesters sympathizing with nations considered to be enemies of U.S. foreign policy, including the Viet Cong and the Sandinistas. "There's no one who will talk about how the other side is good," she reportedly told the San Francisco Chronicle.

Benjamin has also reportedly praised the Cuban regime of Fidel Castro. Benjamin told the San Francisco Chronicle that her visit to Cuba in the 1980s revealed to her a great country. "It seem[ed] like I died and went to heaven," she reportedly said.
 

Gods_Favorite

Star
Registered
Its only a matter of time before these protestors turn on the soldiers, holding rallies at airports when they get back from Iraq and shit.
 

tian

Star
Registered
Gods_Favorite said:
Its only a matter of time before these protestors turn on the soldiers, holding rallies at airports when they get back from Iraq and shit.

They already turned on them when they are holding up signs mocking them as they are lying in their hospital beds. I mean, some of these people are in that hospital fighting for their lives and the protestors are out laying rows of mock caskets on the streets. That's torment!

I guess, soon these protestors will start carrying signs at funerals.... :( :( :(



tian
 

QueEx

Rising Star
Super Moderator
You guys are waaaaay over-reacting. LOL. Dissent is a good thing. Don't misinterpret it as something its not -- and don't let those whose over zealous support for the war for the wrong reasons colour your thoughts against those who exercise their constitutional right to hold the feet of government to the fire.

Its funny how the remnants of Vietnam are still fighting the same fight, all over again. Lessons are some times hard to learn.

QueEx
 

QueEx

Rising Star
Super Moderator
<font size="6"><center>Poll: Many Back Right
to Protest Iraq War</font size></center>


Guardian.gif

Friday August 26, 2005 8:01 AM
By WILL LESTER
Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) - An overwhelming number of people say critics of the Iraq war should be free to voice their objections - a rare example of widespread agreement about a conflict that has divided the nation along partisan lines.

Nearly three weeks after a grieving California mother named Cindy Sheehan started her anti-war protest near President Bush's Texas ranch, nine of 10 people surveyed in an AP-Ipsos poll say it's OK for war opponents to publicly share their concerns about the conflict.

``Part of the Constitution is the First Amendment,'' said Mike Malone, a salesman from Odessa, Fla. ``We have the right to disagree with the government.''

With the U.S. death toll in Iraq climbing past 1,870 with an especially bloody August, the public's opinion of the Bush administration's handling of the war has been eroding over the past two years.

Overall attitudes about the war - while negative - haven't changed dramatically through the summer and a solid majority, 60 percent, want U.S. troops to stick it out until Iraq is stable.

The poll found that most people disapprove of the Bush administration's conduct of the war and think the war was a mistake. Half believe it has increased the threat of terrorism. Democrats overwhelmingly question the president's policies, while Republicans overwhelmingly support them.

Public doubts about the war have gotten new attention since Sheehan, who lost her son Casey in Iraq last year, took her protest to Crawford, Texas, on Aug. 6.

Hundreds of fellow protesters have been drawn to Camp Casey, named for her 24-year-old son. Sheehan's protest sparked hundreds of vigils around the country a week ago.

The AP-Ipsos poll found that Republicans are the most likely to disapprove of people voicing opposition to the war.

Retiree Ruth Carver of Sellersburg, Ind., said she disagrees with Sheehan's protest. ``I think her son would be ashamed of her,'' said Carver, a Republican. ``If I don't like what's going on, I can go to the polls every four years.''

The poll found that 37 percent approve of the way the Bush administration is conducting the war. Three-fourths of Republicans and only 15 percent of Democrats in the poll approve.

Support for Bush's handling of the war was stronger among those who know someone who has served in Iraq - almost half - compared with about a quarter of those who don't know someone who served in Iraq.

More than half of those polled, 53 percent, say the United States made a mistake in going to war in Iraq. That level of opposition is about the same as the number who said that about Vietnam in August 1968, six months after the Tet offensive - the massive North Vietnamese attack on South Vietnamese cities that helped turn U.S. opinion against that war. Various polls have shown that erosion of war support has been faster in Iraq than during the Vietnam War in the 1960s.

``Our attention span is simply shorter,'' said Charles Franklin, a political scientist at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. ``Our willingness to put up with a difficult military situation and losses isn't what it used to be.''

With anti-war protesters getting increased attention, the president has been defending his war policies in speeches in Utah and Idaho, warning that an early withdrawal from Iraq would hurt the United States.

While disagreeing with Sheehan's call to pull troops out of Iraq, Bush said, ``I strongly support her right to protest.''

A solid majority of the public agrees with Bush's stance on staying in Iraq. Six in 10 in the poll support keeping troops in Iraq until it is stabilized rather than pulling them out now.

Robin Brown, a Republican from Douglasville, Ga., says the U.S. troops will eventually achieve their mission ``if people will hang in there with them.''

Iraqi political leaders have been struggling to reach agreement on a constitution that would be acceptable to Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds.

Vivian Snyder, a Republican from Staten Island, N.Y., said she disagreed with the decision to invade Iraq, but doesn't want troops to leave yet. ``Otherwise, it's all for nothing.''

The poll of 1,001 adults was conducted Aug. 22-24 by Ipsos, an international polling firm, and has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.

---

Trevor Tompson, AP's manager of news surveys, contributed to this story.

---

On the Net:

Ipsos: http://www.ap-ipsosresults.com

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uslatest/story/0,1282,-5234922,00.html
 

QueEx

Rising Star
Super Moderator
[frame]http://jang.com.pk/thenews/aug2005-daily/27-08-2005/oped/o1.htm[/frame]
 

tian

Star
Registered
Who's arguing against protesting the Iraq war? The argument is: Is it right for protestors to target wounded soldiers at the hospital? As far as protesting is concerned, I kinda like to see a good protest every now and then.

tian
 

Gods_Favorite

Star
Registered
tian said:
Who's arguing against protesting the Iraq war? The argument is: Is it right for protestors to target wounded soldiers at the hospital? As far as protesting is concerned, I kinda like to see a good protest every now and then.

tian

Exactly, I have no problem with people protesting the war if they want, but targeting wounded soldiers in a hospital is wrong.
 
Top