More of the Left “supporting the troops”.
This time it’s in Chapel Hill, NC (actually, Michelle Malkin reminds us that this isn’t the first time that this group of Chapel Hill thugs has supported attacked our military), where “peace activists” attempted to disrupt the opening of a new Military Recruiting Station and vandalized a few government cars in the process.
The anti-American moonbats at Students for Democratic Society (SDS) claim that, “As protesters we were spreading a message of peace”. Well, if by peace you mean destroying government property and vandalizing property that doesn’t belong to you, then maybe.
In addition to the protests, two government cars parked outside the recruiting station were vandalized with spray painted messages, “Go home!” on one and “Not welcome!” on the other.
Mary Katharine Ham at TownHall:
“Go home,” troops that we totally support. You’re “not welcome,” good men and women of the armed services, whose service we appreciate so sincerely even though we don’t necessarily support your mission in Iraq. Riiight. Tell me more about it.
___________
One of the primary organizers of these protests is Emily McFarlane (shown leading the march in the above picture), a rabid misandrists who — not surprisingly — is in an organization called Feminist Students United.
And why was Emily vandalizing military property? Well, this is how Emily feels about the men in our Military:
We do not want our women subjected to sexual violence. We do not want our young men turned into instruments of sexual violence. We want every person valued and protected from violence and discrimination.
Ah. That’s why Emily wants to shut down the Recruiting Station. It’s not about saving Soldiers from getting stuck in Iraq — it’s because she believes that the Army turns young men into “instruments of sexual violence”.
Hey, Emily: Go fuck yourself. I hope when you graduate with your BA in Feminist Literature, and you apply for your first real job (assuming you don’t just go to work as a full time, Soros-funded activist), I hope your potential employer Google’s your name, finds this posting, and that he’s also a Veteran. And he then he crumples up your application and wipes his ass with it. And then hands it back to you.
Yes, Emily — I hate you as much as you would hate me (and as much as you already do hate the military).
Your priorities are seriously out of whack:
A powerless student protests the army for bizarre reasons and vandalizes a car eliciting your condemnation yet the President of the United States knows damn well that at least 2000 more American men and women will die in Iraq before he leaves office because he refuses to admit that he committed our country’s greatest strategic blunder in two generations.
Look at the big picture, man. Emily McFarlane ain’t it.
Preston – Are you saying it’s ok for everyone to commit lawless acts just because you don’t agree with what the President is doing? That’s not logical. She should be punished. The President can be impeached if his acts are lawless. Until then, you cannot make the comparison.
By the way, I heard on C-Span this morning that meeting with Hamas is against the law (referencing the former post that Robbie wrote about the democrats who allegedly met with Hamas).
We can’t pick and choose what laws we follow in this country.
Vietnam War protestor, novelist and poet, Pat Conroy very recently wrote a mea culpa about his days as a protestor. In it he wrote:
I think anti-military zealots are the bottom layer of scum in our society. I make no apologies for it.
I think current members of the military and veterans are the very best citizens in our nation. I make no apologies for that either.
Dianne- I said nothing of the sort: throw her in jail, she broke the law.
My point is that the relative weight of a vandalized car and the lives of thousands of Americans who are dying for the vanity of our President is so out of balance that it boggles the mind that the Malkins of the world spend time thinking about it.
Robbie-
We agree that it requires a special sacrifice to put your life at risk for one’s country. I wish the leadership of this country honored that sacrifice by not carelessly wasting the lives of Americans when there is no plan for victory. As you may have heard, the Joint Chiefs of Staff unanimously reject the proposition of a surge of American troops into Iraq as pointless.
It’s funny how people like Pat Conroy grow braver when it is no longer their own life put in danger when she is wrong.
Oh – I see so you are criticizing the condemnation of the act because it is, in your opinion, miniscule in comparison to what the President is doing. Well, I still don’t agree with the comparison and I don’t think the President is guilty of causing the death of soldiers because of his vanity. Even the Baker report didn’t call for the immediate withdrawal of troops..are they guilty of vanity too? And what about Harry Reid who said he wouldn’t oppose a temporary troop increase. What about him – is that vanity? All kinds of people are trying to find a solution to this mess.
I really find it quite disturbing that so Democrats hate this President. I don’t think they’d have to look too far back in history to see that most of the recent wars in this country were initiated under Democratic Presidents.
Dianne- the issue raised in this post is about ’supporting the troops’. I believe that continuing policies that will result in the deaths of thousands of Americans cannot be defined as ’supporting the troops’ and is certainly grounds for not supporting a President. Is this an irrational basis for political opposition?
You have stated that you believe this war was an error. What does that mean? Staying in Iraq hoping for a miracle to save us is simply not a responsible policy. I’m not calling for American troops to pack their bags today but there is no reason for American troops to stand in the middle of a civil war. Reagan knew that in Lebanon, Clinton knew that in Somalia, we all know that about Iraq.
For the record Reid says:
“If the commanders on the ground said this is just for a short period of time, we’ll go along with that,” said Reid, D-Nev., citing a time frame such as two months to three months. But a period of 18 months to 24 months would be too long, he said.
“The American people will not allow this war to go on as it has. It simply is a war that will not be won militarily. It can only be won politically,” Reid said.
I could support that policy but since the military does not it it’s a moot point.
Regarding the ISG- yeah there probably is vanity: the vanity the comes from thinking that the President is going to listen to their recommendations when he has made it abundantly clear that he won’t. Furthermore, they went out of their way to select only members for the commission who were wrong about the war in the first place.
As for previous wars in the 20th Century:
Seriously? I’m willing to offer condemnation of Woodrow Wilson if you want but I didn’t think it was a pressing issue. FWIW, I don’t blame Roosevelt for being attacked by the Japanese.
Thousands of Americans have died in every war we’ve ever had. I don’t want soldiers or civilians to die, but war always has casualties. That’s a fact. There has always been war and there always will be war “declared” or not.
I no longer agree that we should stay in Iraq because, as I said before, I don’t believe our soldiers should die for their relgious craziness. If the people were begging us to stay to protect them from their crazed clerics or from the terrorists, that would be different, but it appears they are not. So, let’s just get the hell out in the best manner possible. The fact that Bush and the advisors he listened to did not take this into consideration at the start of the war was a major major mistake.
Bush knows the American public wants out of Iraq, but at this point he has to figure out the best way to get us out using the best advice available. I’m not a military strategist but it looks to me like the help of neighboring countries will be the key. They don’t want the refugees and they don’t want the entire area to erupt in sectarian war. I think there’s even a ray of hope with Iran as the people booted out all of Amajedine’s (sp? to lazy to look) supporters. Certainly Bush has to be working with these other countries on the best way to handle the situation and that can’t be done overnight.
I agree with all of that, Dianne. Unfortunately, the President has made it very clear that he has no interest in speaking to Iraq’s neighbors as a strategy for redeploying US troops. (Somehow Reagan and Kennedy could negotiate with the Soviets- our enemy at the time- yet George Bush won’t. That is why I referred to ‘vanity’. )
You have to view calls for the withdrawal of American troops in the light of the fact that the President continues to disregard these ‘moderate’ solutions as advocated by the ISG and others. This site is another demonstration of how being ‘reasonable’ is often used as a figleaf for doing nothing in Iraq.
Believe me, I understand that US withdrawal may be followed by horrible atrocities. I simply don’t believe that our presence will prevent them- the precipitating event for massive destruction in Iraq isn’t the US withdrawal but the US invasion 3.5 years ago.
Hmm… I think you might be in more hot water than Emily if this blog was ever googled since you sound moronic and some of what you write borders on libel.
1) Every other speaker discussed the death toll of the war (which includes some 60,000 Iraqi civilians, by the way; American deaths aren’t the only ones that count) She merely provided ANOTHER reason to hate the war, not what she thought was the only one.
2) She didn’t vandalize anything. You can’t hold her responsible for others’ actions. Calling her a vandal doesn’t border on libel; it is libel.
3) She doesn’t hate men; she hates sexual assault.
4) XXXXXXXXXXXXXX [editor's note: Ah the fun of being able to edit nasty comments on my own blog]
You get to tell her to go fuck herself but someone can’t say it to you? You’re so patriotic, supporting our troops, but not a big fan of free speech? Or are you only for speech with which you agree? If you disagree, you personally attack the person, regardless of the fact you have never met her. Fascist asshole, you want her future employer to see this blog, find out she is brave enough to take time out of her life to stand up for something she believes despite the fact ignorant assholes like you will attack her for it. I hope everyone in your life sees this blog and finds out you personally and immorally attack people because you disagree with their politics.