To preserve liberty, we must destroy it.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Sindawe

Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2002
Messages
3,480
Location
Outside The People's Republic of Boulder, CO
American Legion Declares War on Protestors -- Media Next?

By E&P Staff

Published: August 24, 2005 4:20 PM ET


NEW YORK The American Legion, which has 2.7 million members, has declared war on antiwar protestors, and the media could be next. Speaking at its national convention in Honolulu, the group's national commander called for an end to all “public protests” and “media events” against the war, constitutional protections be damned.

"The American Legion will stand against anyone and any group that would demoralize our troops, or worse, endanger their lives by encouraging terrorists to continue their cowardly attacks against freedom-loving peoples," Thomas Cadmus, national commander, told delegates at the group's national convention in Honolulu.

The delegates voted to use whatever means necessary to "ensure the united backing of the American people to support our troops and the global war on terrorism."

Cadmus added: "It would be tragic if the freedoms our veterans fought so valiantly to protect would be used against their successors today as they battle terrorists bent on our destruction.”

Without mentioning any current protestor, such as Cindy Sheehan, by name, Cadmus recalled: "For many of us, the visions of Jane Fonda glibly spouting anti-American messages with the North Vietnamese and protestors denouncing our own forces four decades ago is forever etched in our memories. We must never let that happen again….

"We had hoped that the lessons learned from the Vietnam War would be clear to our fellow citizens. Public protests against the war here at home while our young men and women are in harm's way on the other side of the globe only provide aid and comfort to our enemies. "

Resolution 3, which was passed unanimously by 4,000 delegates to the annual event, states: "The American Legion fully supports the president of the United States, the United States Congress and the men, women and leadership of our armed forces as they are engaged in the global war on terrorism and the troops who are engaged in protecting our values and way of life."

Cadmus explained, "No one respects the right to protest more than one who has fought for it, but we hope that Americans will present their views in correspondence to their elected officials rather than by public media events guaranteed to be picked up and used as tools of encouragement by our enemies." This might suggest to some, however, that American freedoms are worth dying for, but not exercising.

"Let's not repeat the mistakes of our past," Cadmus advised. "I urge all Americans to rally around our armed forces and remember our fellow Americans who were viciously murdered on Sept. 11, 2001."

Source: http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1001020671
=========================

The delegates voted to use whatever means necessary to "ensure the united backing of the American people to support our troops and the global war on terrorism."
:cuss: :banghead: :barf:

Some people's kids....
 
Cadmus explained, "No one respects the right to protest more than one who has fought for it, but we hope that Americans will present their views in correspondence to their elected officials rather than by public media events guaranteed to be picked up and used as tools of encouragement by our enemies."
So you don't think its right for The American Legion to ask American's not to protest the war?

Last time I checked, The American Legion was a private organization and not the government. In addition he said "...we hope that..." not "...we command Americans to keep their views to themselves".

Every time someone asks the left politely to be quiet they squawk like their first amendment rights are being violated (much like the Dixie Chicks did) when what's really going on here is that The American Legion is exercising their first amendment rights by asking for civility and support from those Americans who don't agree with the administration on the war.


Methinks you're getting your knickers in a twist unnecessarily.
 
By E&P Staff

Who wrote the article? It starts out with a bang, "American Legion declares WAR on protesters".

There's no war there. Just some discussion.

Regards.
 
Sounds like liberty all around. The protestors can protest and the American Legion will protest the protestors. What's wrong with that?
 
From the American Legion's web site: http://www.legion.org/?section=pub_..._listreleases&content=pr_press_release&id=303

HONOLULU, August 23, 2005 - Delegates to the nation’s largest wartime veterans organization meeting here in national convention today vowed to use whatever means necessary to ensure the united support of the American people for our troops and the global war on terrorism.

“Warriors, above all other people, pray for peace, for they must suffer and bear the deepest wounds and scars of war,” said Thomas P. Cadmus, national commander of The American Legion referring to Gen. Douglas MacArthur’s quote. “We had hoped that the lessons learned from the Vietnam War would be clear to our fellow citizens: public protests against the war here at home while our young men and women are in harm’s way on the other side of the globe only provide aid and comfort to our enemies. We understand that the terrorists they are engaging there would slit the throats of every American, adult and child, if they could.”

The resolution passed unanimously by 4,000 delegates to the annual event states: “The American Legion fully supports the President of the United States, the United States Congress and the men, women, and leadership of our armed forces as they are engaged in the global war on terrorism.”

“For many of us, the visions of Jane Fonda glibly spouting anti-American messages with the North Vietnamese and protestors denouncing our own forces four decades ago is forever etched in our memories,” Cadmus said. “We must never let that happen again. I assure you, The American Legion will stand against anyone and any group that would demoralize our troops, or worse, endanger their lives by encouraging terrorists to continue their cowardly attacks against freedom loving peoples.”

The measure recognizes that the global war on terrorism is as deadly as any war
in which the United States has been previously engaged and that the President and Congress did authorize military actions in both Afghanistan and Iraq.

“No one respects the right to protest more than one who has fought for it, but we hope that Americans will present their views in correspondence to their elected officials rather than by public media events guaranteed to be picked up and used as tools of encouragement by our enemies,“ Cadmus said. “It would be tragic if the freedoms our veterans fought so valiantly to protect would be used against their successors today as they battle terrorists bent on our destruction.

“Let’s not repeat the mistakes of our past,” he added. ”I urge all Americans to rally around our armed forces and remember our fellow Americans who were viciously murdered on Sept. 11, 2001. We must commit ourselves to stand united together to defeat terrorism once and forever.”

The 2.7 million-member American Legion is the nation’s largest veterans organization.
++++++++++++++++++

So I take it that you folks have no problem with the use of the phrase "...any means necessary..."? I've no issue with debate, ridicule, counter-protest, satire and the like. This strikes me as going beyond that, giving tacit approval of going beyond those means to oppose a differing view, even to the point of stifling dissent by threatening or using violence.
 
So I take it that you folks have no problem with the use of the phrase "...any means necessary..."? I've no issue with debate, ridicule, counter-protest, satire and the like. This strikes me as going beyond that, giving tacit approval of going beyond those means to oppose a differing view, even to the point of stifling dissent by threatening or using violence.

Could also mean doing this to them........ :neener:
 
There have been anti-war protesters in every war. Not that I am a huge fan of the ACLU but they were about the only ones who protested civilians being bombed in WWII. Since postwar evidence indicated that bombing the germans only made them more determined to fight back, and while bombing the japanese did destroy their industry, since they were effectively blockaded it did not make any difference- and led to the incineration of hundreds of thousands of women and children (and old men.....and a small percentage of men of fighting age). There were people protesting about the really brutal fighting in the Phillipines at the turn of the century (wonder where your .45 came from?) about the Indian wars earlier, and other conflicts. As for Vietnam protesters- that is a can of worms best left unopened for about 25 more years. I say let them protest. If we have not "won" in Iraq by now, our chances our not good at all that we ever will, so they have a right to be upset about another wall with names going up eventually.
 
Public protests against the war here at home while our young men and women are in harm’s way on the other side of the globe only provide aid and comfort to our enemies.

In other words, "Commander" Thomas P. Cadmus is equating public dissent with treason. It's evidence of his own totalitarian mentality.

"A police state is a small price to pay for living in the freest country on earth." - C. Montgomery Burns
 
Javafiend, he's entitled to express his opinion, just as you're entitled to express yours. Freedom is a wonderful thing!

It sure is, and I never said that "Commander" Cadmus or others with whom I disagree should be gagged or indicted. That's *his* argument, not mine.
 
"Javafiend, he's entitled to express his opinion, just as you're entitled to express yours. Freedom is a wonderful thing!"

...Until 1 side of a debate lobbies for the other side to simply be muzzled...
 
So, uh, anti-war protestors are FREE SPEECH INCARNATE apparently.

But the American Legion had better just shut up.

I mean protesting against the anti-war protestors would be WAR AGAINST FREEDOM!!!!

Okay...got it.

Anti-war protestors are to be protected by any means necessary.......

And nobody, especially a bunch of military veterans, should be allowed to speak out against those anti-war protestors. Allowing others to speak out against the protestors would KILL FREEDOM!!!!!!

Oh jeeze........................


As for "any means necessary," I think there is justification to use such measures against those anti-war protestor types.

If you look at the anti-war protestors, you'll see many of them already exhibiting extreme violence.

Sometimes those anti-war protestors get so worked up that they squeeze the living daylights out of the stem on their glass of chilled chardonnay.

Stop those anti-war protestors before any more wineglasses get the daylights squeezed out of them.

Who knows what the anti-war types might want to squeeze tomorrow?!?!?!?!?!?!?

hillbilly
 
Are these the same strategic luminaries

who decided "we had to destroy the village in order to save it" ? :what:

Yeah, that "by any means necessary" mindset has such a GREAT track record.......:scrutiny:
 
I think it would make great pay-per-view TV to see the American Legion guys go at it against THESE anti-war protestors that Drudge is running a bit on.






ANTI-WAR PROTESTERS TARGET WOUNDED AT ARMY HOSPITAL
Wed Aug 2005 24 21:20:05 ET

Anti-war protestors besieged wounded and disabled soldiers at Walter Reed Hospital in Washington, D.C, a new web report will claim!

CNSNews.com is planning to run an expose on Thursday featuring interviews with both protestors and veterans, as well as shots of protest signs with slogans like “Maimed for a Lie.”

The conservative outlet will post video evidence of the wounded veterans being taunted by protesters, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned.

Developing late...
 
No-one is saying, well no-one here, is saying that any side should not speak their minds. This should be clear.

However, when 1 side moves from speaking their minds into advocating actions against the other side, clearly you should be able to see this is no longer called a debate.

A debate is 2 or more sides exchanging information. When 1 side decides to simply remove the other from the debate, they are, in essence, cheating.
 
As an active duty member I will say that anti war protesters get on my nerves. They are a waste of space and oxygen. People need to stop concentrating on being pacifists and start thinking about what would happen in the future if we pulled out of Iraq.

1980's- Afghanistan- We pull out- 2001 AFghanistan is a Terrorist Safe Haven

2003- Iraq - ???? If we pull out before we are ready.

Don't support me unless you support me.
 
But the American Legion had better just shut up.

Who is telling them to shut up?

And nobody, especially a bunch of military veterans, should be allowed to speak out against those anti-war protestors.

Criticizing anti-war protestors is all fine and dandy, but Commandant went even further. He voiced the opinion that anti-war protest constitutes "giving aid and comfort to the enemy," which is the definition of treason. If I accuse hillbilly of breaking the law, am I not calling for the enforcement of the law against hillbilly?

As for "any means necessary," I think there is justification to use such measures against those anti-war protestor types.

Of course you do. You share the same totalitarian proclivities as Cadmus, O'Reilly, Savage, etc.
 
A debate is 2 or more sides exchanging information. When 1 side decides to simply remove the other from the debate, they are, in essence, cheating.

That's rediculous! Bullcrap, get outta here! :neener:


Seriously, when people look back on Nam and see the problems caused by protesters, they see what problems are being caused by protesters today as well. They see that it encourages the enemy, it erodes public support and backing and it puts our troops and country in more jeopardy. To some people, it's not about debating anymore, if cheating is what it takes to keep our country backed, our enemy starring at a resolved public and this nation in less jeopardy, what's the problem? I kind of see it that protesting, as it has become, is cheating our troops and country. I would rather cheat the protesters. Not by violence.....well maybe a some good b*tchs slap now and then wouldn't hurt. :p
 
Once we stop supporting the rights of those we disagree with, it's over. But whatchagonnado, humans are stoopid that wey.

"1980's- Afghanistan- We pull out- 2001 AFghanistan is a Terrorist Safe Haven"

I see where you're going with this, and you have a good point. But, the thing is it was Russia that pulled out. It's a fair comparison, had Russia persevered and not been shot-up with Stinger missiles, then it is safe to say Soviet military policy would have subdued the country, and their famed justice system would have eliminated most rebels.

However, they were dependent on air-mobility, specifically helicopters to patrol and secure impassable areas. And someone with military expertise realized this, and supplied the goods to take out this weak point.

A fair comparison could be made to roadside IEDs in Iraq, possibly made with foreign expertise and components. The weak leak seems to be maintaining a presence in a large area, and roads are the transport medium of choice, so this is targeted.

And I fully agree, Iraq MUST be secured and a form of democracy MUST be implemented, now. I think the country was really quite benign before the invasion, but anyone who believes that 'walking away' from Iraq is a good idea is foolish, I agree with you. Without a lot of help and a functioning democracy the country WILL turn into the terrorist home-base you suggest. And if this happens, and they aren't being attacked, they will obviously go on the offensive, and export their violence. I guess it's like a fire, it's started, and if we walk away it will just grow.
 
If anyone thinks that these anti-war protestors are real pacificits you have read too much propaganda. There may be less than 1% that are but the others are not. It is just a Orwellian cover. Same as the Commies protesting the WW2 until Germany invaded theirr utopia the USSR. Some as every leftist in the US trying like heck to make sure we lost the cold war. They still try to justify socialism by stating it has just not been tried in the right way or right country YET. They always will protest any war the USA wages that is in the interests of the Capitalist System that they must destroy. Really surely most of us have read some history. They would kill their grandmother if she stood in the way of their political religion and nihilism. Look at any Socialist state and see beyond the progaganda and you will see no utopia. :scrutiny:
 
Sigh.

I will not state my position on the war.

What I will say is I see this "protesting erodes support and demoralizes and aids the enemy so on and so on..." stuff as a cheap shot.

It is nothing more than an attempt to shame people into not expressing their (totaly reasonable) veiws, which is always a bad thing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top