It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

OP/ED: The Face of American Grief

page: 1
1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 17 2005 @ 08:54 PM
link   
Cindy Sheehan once stood alone on the road to President Bush's Crawford Ranch. She is no longer alone. After being picked up by the media her story has galvanized America's anti-war population and turned Ms Sheehan into a lightning rod for Conservative anger. The difference? This time the frothing rottweiler attacks of the right wing are merely ignored, brushed aside and disregarded.
 



No matter what your opinion of Ms Sheehan it cannot be denied that she has dragged the press --kicking and screaming-- into covering her angle. She is one mother against the machine and she seems to be winning. Public support is on her side with crowds of people flocking to Crawford, TX to support her and protest beside her.

President Bush naturally refuses to meet her. He has nothing to gain and cannot possibly come off well against an angry mother who has given her son for her country. She wants to know simply why her son was sent to Iraq.

Groups such as MoveOn have taken Ms Sheehan under their wings to cultivate her story and try to build a meaningful legacy. Tonight many "Cindy Vigils" have popped up across America. They are small, candle lit vigils in public places to show support for Cindy.

With disapproval ratings reaching 58% in States like South Dakota and a long, deathly silence from the White House Press Secretary on the matter; it leads one to wonder how long this protest will go on for until it reaches its critical mass.

Cindy Sheehan is one mother of one dead son. Whilst she does not speak for the nation she speaks for herself, and for her son.

Related News Links:
news.bbc.co.uk
news.google.com
www.alertnet.org

[edit on 18-8-2005 by Nerdling]

[edit on 18-8-2005 by John bull 1]




posted on Aug, 17 2005 @ 09:16 PM
link   
Bush could have so easily avoided this except for his lack of care and concern for others getting in his way. The man could have agreed to meet with her privately when she asked for a second meeting. This is the mother of a slain soldier and whether you agree with her stance on this war or not she asked her president to talk to her about it. She has sacrificed the ultimate gift to her country, she has lost her child and he can't find time to talk to her but he does have time to vacation for 5 weeks. I don't think that she has asked too much not in light of what she has lost.

[edit on 17-8-2005 by goose]



posted on Aug, 17 2005 @ 09:28 PM
link   
Yeah I think it might be a better move to simply speak with her in private. After all I doubt she's there to humilate him, after all as said before me, it's not like he's busy, he's on vacation.



posted on Aug, 17 2005 @ 09:36 PM
link   

as posted by goose
The man could have agreed to meet with her privately when she asked for a second meeting.

Purely ludicrous.

Question: Bush has met with a couple hundred families of soldiers who have been KIA, including the Sheehan family, as such, why should he met with her one more time when he has not met with any other family twice?
Is it because:
....she is an exceptional case?
....she has an exceptional case?
....she is against the war and has a host of anti-war leaning mainstream media plastering her story all over the news?
....she is camped out before his ranch?
....Bush is on vacation and this is as good of a time to gain a second meeting with him then any other time?

What exactly makes her so special that Bush should met with her again?

If she is galvanizing the anti-war movement, be assured that she is also galvanizing the pro-war movement. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. The problem with this is that the mainstream media is only reporting her side. Quite self-evident as to why, huh?

He should meet with her again? Not, and for a number of reasons.
Hell would freeze over first....






seekerof

[edit on 17-8-2005 by Seekerof]



posted on Aug, 17 2005 @ 09:47 PM
link   
Bush will never talk to this lady..


"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 #ing() hypocrites! And we need to, we just need to rise up..."



"If George Bush believes his rhetoric and his bull#(), that this is a war for freedom and democracy, that he is spreading freedom and democracy, does he think every person he kills makes Iraq more free?"



"The whole world is damaged. Our humanity is damaged. If he thinks that it’s so important for Iraq to have a U.S.-imposed sense of freedom and democracy, then he needs to sign up his two little party-animal girls. They need to go to this war."


Would you?



posted on Aug, 17 2005 @ 09:51 PM
link   
Good point to both of you. However I think Bush should just meet with her if only to make her go away. Really, if he meets with her then she's all out of reasons to stay in Crawford. After that if her little ontourage sticks around then they're just being a nuisence. But of course the media will drive this so far that I'll never get to see the real news on the television. Well thank God, Simon and Skeptic for ATSNN.

I have to be honest, I'm the kind of person who likes to enjoy my vacation. I'd just meet with the lady and get on with my vacation. Although some of his policies are disagreeable to some, he is President so naturally he does a but load of work. Of course I'm the kind of person who considers an annual vacation to be a sacred time that should be enjoyed.

So although I don't like his policies, I hope that my President can just resolve the issue and have a nice vacation.

[edit on 8/17/2005 by cyberdude78]



posted on Aug, 17 2005 @ 09:55 PM
link   
He's not going to meet with her. He knows every word he says to her will not justify the "reasons" of war.

No reason ever justifies a war.. any war.

Even if he did speak with her, do you honestly think she'd just stop?



posted on Aug, 17 2005 @ 09:58 PM
link   
Yes, I think she would stop.



posted on Aug, 17 2005 @ 10:09 PM
link   
No, I don't think this woman is the "face of America's grief". She's the face of her own grief. She may be the face of a few mothers' grief. She didn't drag the media into this...they drug her. Mainstream media makes drama now, they don't report news.



posted on Aug, 17 2005 @ 10:10 PM
link   
Of course even if she stops theres still who knows how many protestors out there. I don't think most of them would just walk away peacefully even after she leaves. Thats the thing about protestors, short of giving them control of the goverment they're never happy.



posted on Aug, 17 2005 @ 10:18 PM
link   

Of course even if she stops theres still who knows how many protestors out there. I don't think most of them would just walk away peacefully even after she leaves. Thats the thing about protestors, short of giving them control of the goverment they're never happy.


Well, once a movement has started, its quite hard, if not impossible, to end it. So yeah, if this lady steps down, someone else will step up. That's a given.

And I'm sure Bush knows this (or was "learned" this).. so what's the point?

I remember watching a documentary on Vietnam, and they interviewed alot of the reporters and media that extensively covered the anti-war protests.. and every single one of them said they would never repeat the mistake, that their drive caused deaths, and that it was a dark day for media..

Wish I remembered the name of the documentary.. I would email it to all the media outlets ...



posted on Aug, 17 2005 @ 10:20 PM
link   
Have you seen the pictures of the candlelit vigils?

Some very large crowds.



posted on Aug, 17 2005 @ 10:24 PM
link   
Looks like the smear campaign has begun, just as moveon.org predicted with none other than Matt Drudge....





posted on Aug, 17 2005 @ 10:25 PM
link   
No, care to supply some?

As a bargaining token, I'll supply a bunch of picks of the protests at Camp Casey

cryptome.org...




posted on Aug, 17 2005 @ 10:29 PM
link   
MoveOn.org predicted alot of things, as with Code Pink and Michael Moore, all of whom are in Cindy Sheehan's shadow, nudging and manipulating.

dgtempe, MoveOn.org is doing nothing but trying to fight fire with fire.
It is all apart of the calculated game here.




seekerof

[edit on 17-8-2005 by Seekerof]



posted on Aug, 17 2005 @ 10:33 PM
link   

as posted by Nerdling
Have you seen the pictures of the candlelit vigils?

Some very large crowds.


No, I have not seen them, care to share them with us?
I am sure the crowd appeared large in perspective, probably as large as the pro-war crowd that rolled in last weekend, as well.







seekerof



posted on Aug, 17 2005 @ 10:37 PM
link   
NYC, Upper West Side. (large)


Kalamazoo, Michigan. 300+

Durham, NC (300-400)




Evanston, IL. 700+


Iowa City, Iowa. 200+

Just a few, there are maaany more.



posted on Aug, 17 2005 @ 10:43 PM
link   
Hey Nerdling, that is great stuff.
Everyone, including Mrs. Sheehan has every right to protest and express how they feel. I don't think anyone, especially me, has been disputing this.

Again, great stuff, and thanks for sharing them with us.








seekerof



posted on Aug, 17 2005 @ 10:44 PM
link   

Princeton, NJ.


Nashville, TN.

And, one of the biggest.



The White House



posted on Aug, 17 2005 @ 11:33 PM
link   


Minneapolis/St Paul!



new topics

top topics



 
1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join