 |
| ||
|
||||||||
|
May 15, 2008 Summer Soldiers by Any Other Name: Act IIBy Kyle-Anne Shiver
American patriots should have known better, I suppose, than to think that the Winter Soldiers would have enough pride not to show their faces in public again after their March tomfoolery in Silver Spring, MD. The American public is not being fooled, in my opinion. But the Iraq Veterans Against the War (IVAW), aka Winter Soldiers, have now found a willing audience in Congress, that is sure to fawn over them with all the theatrics of a Soviet-style show trial. The Progressive Congressional Caucus (PCC; now there's a hoot) is laying out the red carpet, the one we taxpayers provide by the sweat of our brows, so that they can hear "testimony" by a tiny group of veterans, who are apparently unhappy about the fact that the American people decided we needed to fight a war while they were in uniform. Cloaking one's own cowardice in scurrilous accusations against others seems brazen beyond belief, in my view, but the show will go on and everyone will play their parts to as much media attention as can be bought. What is the Progressive Congressional Caucus, you may wonder Succinctly, this is the group of congressional representatives and one senator, who are responsible for "progressing" the Marxist cause in America. They probably don't call themselves, "The Socialists," for the same reason the "Winter Soldiers," don't call themselves "Socialist Summer Soldiers." These more genuine monikers would be seen as un-American. Thus the switcheroo. One of the best examples of PCC lunacy was Californian Pete Stark's statement last year (in the SCHIP debates) about our soldiers in Iraq "getting their heads blown off for the president's amusement." Stark is a proud PCC member, as are Henry Waxman, Maxine Waters, Barney Frank, Jesse Jackson, Jr., Charles Rangel and Dennis Kucinich. And could this far, far, far, far left caucus possibly be complete without Keith Ellison, the only Muslim member, and Bernie Sanders, the only openly avowed Socialist member? No, of course not. At the moment, the PCC's most pressing cause is to engineer America's withdrawal and defeat in Iraq and Afghanistan. And they are following their forebears' successful game plan from the Vietnam era, right down to naming the anti-war groups the same, and parading dissident vets in the halls of our congress. The Progressive Congressional Caucus states that their overall cause is to fulfill The Progressive Promise of fairness to all. Right now, though, they're kind of stuck in the world as God made it, and must spend their lives and our money hearing the grievances of unsatisfied consumers. Enter the IVAW, stage left. The scene, the actors and the story line Act I of this beyond amusing little production began in Silver Spring, MD in March. Ticket sales, unfortunately, were not open to the public; it was a private performance at this point. In fact, it was so private, that according to a naval officer, who was there (outside):
I couldn't agree more. Making scurrilous accusations against others in secret is not only cowardly, it's downright un-American. But perhaps Silver Spring was merely a rehearsal for Act II, a chance to hone stories and act more convincingly for a broader audience, the PCC folks in D.C., whose hearing today is purported to be open, although requests from the Gathering of Eagles to speak have not been answered as of this writing. Perhaps only those reading from the same script will be allowed as this show-and-tell performance. There will be crashers in the audience, though. Both Gathering of Eagles and Eagles Up promise to have honorable vets in attendance. Thank the Constitution for that. The single purpose of the troop-support groups in attending is to ensure that statements are made under oath with verifiable corroboration, in accordance with the United States Constitutional guarantees to due process and the right to face one's accuser. The charges that the IVAW are making are serious, and when they make them in a public forum, they must be scrutinized in the same fashion as any other charges of wrongdoing. War crimes are not something we, as Americans, take lightly. As Lt. Col. (ret) Steve Russell, reminds us:
All under the rule of law Whatever these IVAW and PCC people may think of themselves, however they choose to play this out, they, too, are citizens who must live under the rule of law. We Americans were bamboozled by the first Winter Soldiers of 1971, who turned out to be mostly phonies and pawns of our communist enemies. We were fooled then; we didn't have the internet. As citizens, we have the right to examine serious allegations according to the rule of law. And we have the duty to ensure that accusations against our own military in a time of war, are fully investigated and corroborated before they are taken seriously. That is why Gathering of Eagles is sponsoring a petition to Congress that supports and requires accountability for those who participate in the Winter Soldier project. As an American citizen, my belief in equality under the rule of law has compelled me to sign on to this effort, letting those who put on show trials know that this is not the USSR. We don't like it when people put political agendas ahead of our own safety by undermining our war efforts. Lt. Col. (ret) Steve Russell says it best:
Indeed, it is shameful. And we must, as citizens, do all we can to make certain that every legal standard is followed to the letter. And if and when the accusations of the Winter Soldiers are adjudged to be unfounded, then we should amplify our disdain for their unconscionable actions. Then, perhaps, it will be time for Americans to once again employ Patton-style shaming and shunning. In the meantime, it might be wise to remember this old Patton dictum, when weighing the "testimony" of the Winter Soldiers in Congress today:
Kyle-Anne Shiver is a frequent contributor to American Thinker. She blogs at http://www.commonsenseregained.com/ and welcomes your comments at kyleanneshiver@gmail.com.
|
Recent Articles
Blog Posts
|
|
||
Comments
Uh... hello. What's going on? I've sent you 4 emails lately, and no reply from you yet.
On what you wrote here, I didn't know that Jesse Jackson, Jr., Charles Rangel, Pete Stark, Keith Ellison and Dennis Kucinich were members of the PCC. Eh... Charles Rangel. The same guy who claimed that the President doesn't care about American soldiers as strongly as about his children. What an unsympathethic crowd.
Posted by: Zbigniew Mazurak | May 15, 2008 10:24 AM
The war was a mistake but why help the enemy?
Posted by: Russ | May 15, 2008 10:51 AM
Actually, when these accusations are found to be false, they should be prosecuted for bearing false witness. They perfectly know well that these accusations are false and invented and when they are proved to be false, then these people should be made to pay dearly for their activities.
Willi Schumacher
Posted by: Willi Schumacher | May 15, 2008 11:00 AM
"The single purpose of the troop-support groups in attending is to ensure that statements are made under oath with verifiable corroboration, in accordance with the United States Constitutional guarantees ...And if and when the accusations of the Winter Soldiers are adjudged to be unfounded, then we should amplify our disdain for their unconscionable actions.
Then, perhaps, it will be time for Americans to once again employ ..."
... charges of perjury and treason, with appropriate penalties to follow.
Posted by: Michael Mick | May 15, 2008 11:10 AM
Kyle-Anne's usual fine work here. Thanks.
Posted by: Lee Cary | May 15, 2008 11:27 AM
This effort is a phony as it appears, the fact that the PCC will listen to them and there agenda past and present, paints a clear masterpiece of their plans for the future.
Posted by: scott lee | May 15, 2008 01:15 PM
Kyle Anne: Congrats on another great artical. It is incredible what a once great political party has come to. If an objective observer of our House in action were asked to come up with the "Royalty of congressional Buffoons they could not top the list in your artical. I'll relist it here just because it needs repetition:
Stark, Waxman, Waters, Frank, Jackson Jr, Rangel, kucinich, Ellison, and Sanders.
With this group in charge these hearings could be High Comedy if the subject wasn't so damn serious.
This goes hand in hand with the rantings of one of our most blatant of fools of the MSM, one Keith Olberman.
The following from MRC:
On 14 May Olbermann accused the President of the United States of "creating" an america that includes "cold blooded killers who will kill people to achieve political objectives...they are those in, or formerly in , your employ, who may yet be charged someday with war crimes" continuing on he called for the President to "Shut the hell up"
This is one great example of the "even-handed" treatment of all sides of our most important issues by our MSM. It also heralds the direction a untethered Democratic Congress will be taking if they are in charge after November.
Unbelievably Scary
LEE
Posted by: Lee Hazel | May 15, 2008 02:46 PM
Just turn the PCC around, add another "C" and voila CCCP.
Posted by: John Q | May 15, 2008 03:09 PM
I couldn't agree more. Great article.
Posted by: Ray Eakles | May 15, 2008 06:04 PM
I find it absoulutly astounding that after more than a year of work by Rolling Thunder and a dozen other POW / MIA advocacy groups collecting far more than enough support to bring H. Res. 111 (To Create A Select Committe on POW/MIA Affairs) to a vote on the floor of the U.S. House, The Speaker claims she can not allow it to move forward due to budgetary constraints; yet she has no problem "rolling out the red carpet" for the IVAW and The PCC.
Astounding yes, surprising no.
Posted by: Bart Near | May 16, 2008 04:20 PM
The IVAW Winter Soldier Hearings of 2008 was a project of the old Maoists of the Vietnam Veterans Against the War in Vietnam, led by David Cline (head of the leftist Veterans for Peace, which is the name of its precedessor, the old, congressionally cited Communist Part front that functioned from the Korean War thru Vietnam).
This farce was not held for political reasons, a mistake many on our side make, but for IDEOLOGICAL REASONS. Listen to the language of these so-called and real Iraq veterans who testify, and it is straight out of the Marxist propaganda handbook.
My son fought in Iraq and he never used the leftist language of the protesters to describe what went on there (real or imagined). Then again, my son is no fool and would not allow himself to be used by the communist left.
The Progressive Caucus is hard Left, period, and their goal is the same as that of any marxist group, to undermine the power and leadership of the United States as the leader of the Free World.
"None Dare Call It Treason" isn't just the title of a book. It is, sadly, a current state of mind of too many Americans.
Posted by: Max Friedman | May 16, 2008 08:10 PM
The IVAW rabble modeled their efforts from their hero John Kerry's debacle of 1971...that in itself should indicate expectations from any spewing IVAW might make...IVAW is comprised of a bunch of whiny, juvenile, immature failures looking for a "socialist" handout.
The blubbering active duty misfit that announced he would not honor his orders to Iraq was being supported by another active duty female just behind him.
Why is the Army allowing active duty members to be part of an organization undermining American policy and contributing to enemy success?
Where in hell has American leadership gone?
Posted by: Harry Riley | May 16, 2008 08:51 PM
In a previous article by Kyle-Anne, it reads:
'Medea Benjamin is (...) a lover of dictators everywhere.'
These words have been accompanied with a photo of T-shirts produced by Mrs Benjamin emblazoned with the sickle and the hammer. What I still don't know is:
How is it possible for people like Mrs Benjamin to behave so follishly, even though evidence after evidence of the Soviet bloc's crimes against humanity has been unearthed, and after all the witnesses (including many Poles) have told the rest of humanity what it was like during the Soviet era, and books after books have been written about the Soviet times. And yet, Mrs Benjamin has accused AMERICA of crimes against humanity. Where do such stupid people come from?
Posted by: Zbigniew Mazurak | May 17, 2008 05:56 AM
Now for the real tragedy of this. The IVAW takes tax exempt contributions under the auspices of the VFPs 501(c)3 "charitable organization" tax exempt status. The VVAW claims tax exempt status but does NOT have their Tax Exemption number on their website. Code Pink is also a 501(c)3 organization. EACH of these organizations has some form of link to organizations which assist and advise soldiers to go AWOL and Desert. Code Pink has a "War Tax Resistance" project advising it's members to hold back a portion of their tax return equal to the protion of the National Budget percentage spent on Iraq and Afghanstan, not to mention the Phillipines, Cape Horn, or SubSaharan campaigns since they're probably unaware that they even exist under operation OEF
The tax resistance project is a violation, I believe of chapters of Title 26 USC "Internal Revenue Code". The assistance to war resisters is covered, again I believe since I am not an attorney, of Title 18 USC, "Crimes and Criminal Procedure"
In other words, our tax dollars are going to these organizations which have the goal of undermining US policy and our warriors.
Posted by: Tom Helsel | May 21, 2008 02:38 PM
NOTE: No one can claim that there wasn't any warning that Sarkozy would've been a disappointment. There was - a warning from me, sent to the Editor's mailbox, but also to Kyle-Anne personally. Since then, I've also taked to several other AT columnists about this. No one listened to me, though, except Kyle-Anne - and now Sarkozy's fans are in a hole and keep digging.
About Sarkozy again: yet MORE PROOF has been supplied by Dr Gardiner of the Heritage Foundation. More proof that Sarkozy is no pro-American conservative, but rather an anti-American protectionist liberal. More proof that unfortunately, Mr Dunn, Mrs Shiver, Mrs Feldman, Mr Lewis and Mr Walker were flat wrong about Sarkozy.
http://www.heritage.org/Press/Commentary/ed050708a.cfm
And earlier today, Sarkozy has announced that he will NEVER abolish the 35-hour working week:
http://au.news.yahoo.com/080527/2/1711z.html
This means that France is in the final stage of its decay, as the unconditional abolition of the 35-HWW would be one of the measures necessary to 'bring France back', as one AT columnist has written. Yahoo! did not even attempt to conceal the reason Sarkozy has refused to reverse the 35-HWW is that he is AFRAID to anger unions and voters, whereas Mrs Shiver said that Sarkozy is a brave man. Sorry, Kyle-Anne, but you were flat wrong.
What France needs is a _radical_ reform, an overhaul of its economy. Cosmetic changes like modifying the special retirement privileges of some sectors will cause no effect. Here we are, in the REAL world, a year after Sarkozy was inaugurated. What is France like? Exactly as I've warned it would - declining, outdated, ailing.
Posted by: Zbigniew Mazurak | May 27, 2008 09:19 AM