Re: Sheehan tells it like it is!

I gave an oposing view supported by facts


I offered up a possible answer to that question supported by facts


In my original post I clarified her misleading statements, offered sources of verification

well, to start w/ a little aside, but one that will come right back around to your original post, we know that facts are not something this administration considers very important. the case can be made, quite unanimously i should add, that this administration creates its own facts to fit policy. recall the quote from the admin sycophant presented in the suskind article last fall:

The aide said that guys like me were "in what we call the reality-based community," which he defined as people who "believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality." I nodded and murmured something about enlightenment principles and empiricism. He cut me off. "That's not the way the world really works anymore," he continued. "We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality - judiciously, as you will - we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do."

[full article @]

one official example of this 'fitting facts to policy' m.o. is the downing street minutes, which figures prominently in the questions being asked of gwb, not only by cindy, but also by scores of others, domestic & otherwise. this document, the downing street minutes, is a fact. verified. official. explicit.

this admin has shrugged off this fact b/c it does not fit their desired reality. unfortunately for cindy & several thousand other families, the reality that they have to face is that their real flesh & blood children/spouses/parent(s)/brothers/sisters/neices/nephews/cousins are very permanently now dead. there is no way to mask this fact w/ rhetorical tricks.

so the entire context for cindy's mission, as well as that of a growing number of those other families, it to discern what the fact truly are. and when something like the downing street minutes comes along & it indicates an entirely different reality than the official line, then doesn't it make sense that some questions are certainly in order? cindy has some questions for gwb b/c some things aren't adding up & her family has paid the ultimate price. cindy asks for the truth. this is the context of her pilgrimage, so please don't bury that point or attempt to spin it out of the equation. you seem to have completely missed that context, for whatever reason, perhaps intentional, perhaps it exists outside your reality tunnel.

so back to your orig post. first, those were not "facts." opinion polls stats are not facts. also, you cherry-pick. gwb's approval ratings are lower than that for any prez since roper et al began collecting data.

second, i didn't see anything that i would qualify as a fact in your entire post, thus my discounting of the effectiveness of your persuasive appeal, which also was w/o any solid footing. but you've followed up w/ the phrases i extracted above, so i'll try to continue, fwiw.

did you, perhaps, feel that this conclusion of yours was a fact:

The only phenomenon I see is that the silent majority is waking up and responding to a vigil that mainstream America cannot sympathize with

or this assertion:

it's been widely under-reported that President Bush has already met with Mrs. Sheehan

neither of these are facts, but you claim there were some in there. on the second stmt, where do you draw "widely under-reported" from? i've read a number of interviews where cindy tells of her encounter w/ gwb. i don't follow corporate news programming, but there is a wide selection of articles on the web that mention this aspect of her story. check out the wikipedia entry for some more details

Mrs. Sheehan walked away from that meeting having nothing but glowing comments for the President and his "genuine concern"

even if this attribution were true, which you do not provide sourcing for, explain to me how it is relevant following the revelations of the downing street minutes, among others.

Could it be that she has become a mouthpiece for MOVEON.ORG?

well now you're off into conspiracy land smears and, last time i checked, is not an anti-war organization. [relevant link -]

i bet you were hoping this was one of those facts:

you spend your nights in a hotel (source: NPR, 19AUG05)

new flash! npr == voa for the white consumer class. execs start w/ the explicit govt propaganda agencies & then move to the domestic front, incl. the cpb. google & research it.

it's striking that, having ommitted the context of cindy's vigil, you attempt to smear her as a liar w/ a trivial semantic squabble over what constitutes a "hotel". yet you completely let the larger, and lethal, lies go unchallenged. what is this noble cause, gwb? why do the downing street minutes say your admin was fixing the facts around policy in order to provide rational for first strike aggression against a sovereign nation? there's no comparison & you look silly pushing propaganda of this sort.

i don't feel like opening the israel([search]) debate at this time, but suffice it to say, cindy has voiced the concern that most informed people are already making. if you are attempting to raise the "anti-semite" card, give it a rest. seriously.

the remaining ad hominems in that paragraph belie an ignorance & mindset that reveals most of what any reader needs to know about the purpose of your little polemic, completely sidestepping real issues w/ no evidence displayed of a grasp of either fact or reality as they apply to this event. imo, either a usefool idiot for fascist rightwing types, or a bumbling propagandist of some sort. you have clarified nothing of the sort that you imagine to be so, though your words speak volumes to those paying attention.

two final thoughts, quick & direct:

1. in the solution department - including discussion continued in comments
2. for deprogramming, consider checking out your local 'veterans for peace' group

Account Login

Media Centers


An inglorious peace is better than a dishonorable war.
-- Mark Twain
Source: "Glances at History" (suppressed)

This site made manifest by dadaIMC software