letter from a soldier

[1Irbegirlforever]

If this doesn't belong in this thread, i apologize. I just got this email that i think will give everybody some peace about what's happening in all our lives.

Subject: A letter from a soldier


A California mother whose son is right now in Kuwait poised to knock
Saddam's block off, wrote her son asking how he would feel if she joined
other relatives of service members in an anti-war demonstration in Hollywood last month. After reading her son's response, she elected not to
participate.

Dear Mom:

It's really your decision to march if you want to or not. You are the one
who has to decide if what we are doing out here is right or not. My opinion
is not yours. I do, however,have things I would like for you and Grandma and everyone else at home to know. I am a United States soldier.

I was sworn to defend my country against all enemies, foreign and domestic. People may not agree with the things we are ordered to
do. I would like to address those people by telling them that terrorism is
not only a threat to us as Americans, but to many other innocent people in
the world.

What type of country would we be if we didn't defend the rights and freedoms of others, not because they're Americans, but how
about just because they're human? We live in a country where people feel secure with their daily lives. They do business like usual and don't worry about the thought of terrorism actually happening to them.

The people of 9-11 thought the same thing. We now know that it can happen to anyone at any time. Yet as Americans we're afraid of
losing our soldiers to defend our security. I can only speak for myself when I say that my life is an easy expense to ensure that my family and friends can live in peace. I strongly believe in what we are doing and wish you were here to see for yourselves the honor and privilege that American soldiers aboard this ship are feeling, knowing that we are going to be a part of something so strong and so meaningful to the safety of our loved ones. Then you would know what this potential war is about. We will stand tall in front of terrorism and defeat it. We as soldiers are not afraid of what may happen. We are only afraid of Americans not being able to understand why we are here. I ask for your courage as Americans to be strong for us; I ask for your understanding in what we believe is right. I ask for your support in what we are sworn to do: defend our country and the life of all. We will succeed in our task and will end the threat of
terrorism in our backyard. We will also end the threat of terrorism in our
neighbors'.

We have to remind ourselves of what this country stands for: life, liberty
and justice for all. In order to maintain those rights we have to stop the
threat of terrorism.

I am proud to be here. I will be coming home, but not until I know that it's
going to be safe for all Americans and for everyone I love. My family is
first. My country is where they live. I will defend it.

P.S. Mom, please send this to everyone who has a hard time understanding why we are here. Ask the paper to put what I've said in a
column so that others will know why we are here and what we are here for. I love you all and will be home soon.


(I chose to leave out the name and address of the young man as it was a personal message to a family member.)

[1Irbegirlforever]

If this doesn't belong in this thread, i apologize. I just got this email that i think will give everybody some peace about what's happening in all our lives.

Subject: A letter from a soldier


A California mother whose son is right now in Kuwait poised to knock
Saddam's block off, wrote her son asking how he would feel if she joined
other relatives of service members in an anti-war demonstration in Hollywood last month. After reading her son's response, she elected not to
participate.

Dear Mom:

It's really your decision to march if you want to or not. You are the one
who has to decide if what we are doing out here is right or not. My opinion
is not yours. I do, however,have things I would like for you and Grandma and everyone else at home to know. I am a United States soldier.

I was sworn to defend my country against all enemies, foreign and domestic. People may not agree with the things we are ordered to
do. I would like to address those people by telling them that terrorism is
not only a threat to us as Americans, but to many other innocent people in
the world.

What type of country would we be if we didn't defend the rights and freedoms of others, not because they're Americans, but how
about just because they're human? We live in a country where people feel secure with their daily lives. They do business like usual and don't worry about the thought of terrorism actually happening to them.

The people of 9-11 thought the same thing. We now know that it can happen to anyone at any time. Yet as Americans we're afraid of
losing our soldiers to defend our security. I can only speak for myself when I say that my life is an easy expense to ensure that my family and friends can live in peace. I strongly believe in what we are doing and wish you were here to see for yourselves the honor and privilege that American soldiers aboard this ship are feeling, knowing that we are going to be a part of something so strong and so meaningful to the safety of our loved ones. Then you would know what this potential war is about. We will stand tall in front of terrorism and defeat it. We as soldiers are not afraid of what may happen. We are only afraid of Americans not being able to understand why we are here. I ask for your courage as Americans to be strong for us; I ask for your understanding in what we believe is right. I ask for your support in what we are sworn to do: defend our country and the life of all. We will succeed in our task and will end the threat of
terrorism in our backyard. We will also end the threat of terrorism in our
neighbors'.

We have to remind ourselves of what this country stands for: life, liberty
and justice for all. In order to maintain those rights we have to stop the
threat of terrorism.

I am proud to be here. I will be coming home, but not until I know that it's
going to be safe for all Americans and for everyone I love. My family is
first. My country is where they live. I will defend it.

P.S. Mom, please send this to everyone who has a hard time understanding why we are here. Ask the paper to put what I've said in a
column so that others will know why we are here and what we are here for. I love you all and will be home soon.


(I chose to leave out the name and address of the young man as it was a personal message to a family member.)

[JaroFan]

That was a great letter. Here's another one, to the Dixie Chicks.

Name: LT Layne McDowell
Date: 03/15/03
Time: 01:54:49 PM

An open letter to the Dixie Chicks:
Earlier this week, while performing in London, you stated that you were
ashamed that our President is from your home state. I wonder if you realized
how many Americans would be listening. This American was listening. This
Texan is ashamed that you come from my state. I serve my country as an
officer in the United States Navy. Specifically, I fly F-14 Tomcats off
carriers around the world, executing the missions that preserve the very
freedom you claim to exercise. I have proudly fought for my country in the
skies over Kosovo, Iraq and Afghanistan without regret. Though I
may disagree wholeheartedly with your comments, I will defend to the death
your right to say them in America. But for you to travel to a foreign land
and publicly
criticize our Commander in Chief is cowardice behavior. Would you have so
willingly made those comments while performing for a patriotic, flag-waving
crowd of Texans in Lubbock. I would imagine not. How dare you pocket profits
off songs about soldiers,
their deaths and patriotism while criticizing their Commander in Chief
abroad, even while they prepare to give their lives to ensure your own
freedom of speech. Please ask yourself, what have you done to deserve that
sacrifice? Do not try to justify your comments by claiming that you made
them only because you care about innocent lives. Never once in our history
have we committed troops to war for the purpose of taking innocent lives. We
do it to protect innocent lives, even yours. If the world leaders of the
late 1930's had the vision and courage of our present Commander in
Chief, perhaps the evil men who caused the death of millions in WWII would
have never had the opportunity to harm a soul. The potential loss of
millions of lives in the future at the hands of today's evil mennecessitate
action. In a separate correspondence, I am returning to you each and every
Dixie Chicks CD and
cassette that I have ever purchased. Never again will I allow my funds to
support your behavior. All you have done is to add your name to a growing
list of American "Celebrities" who have failed to realize that they have
obtained their successes on the backs of the American blue-collar workers
such as our servicemen and women.

To Natalie Maines: This Texan, this American will continue to risk his life
to guarantee your freedoms. What will you do to deserve it?

Sincerely,
LT. Layne McDowell
United States Navy

[JaroFan]

That was a great letter. Here's another one, to the Dixie Chicks.

Name: LT Layne McDowell
Date: 03/15/03
Time: 01:54:49 PM

An open letter to the Dixie Chicks:
Earlier this week, while performing in London, you stated that you were
ashamed that our President is from your home state. I wonder if you realized
how many Americans would be listening. This American was listening. This
Texan is ashamed that you come from my state. I serve my country as an
officer in the United States Navy. Specifically, I fly F-14 Tomcats off
carriers around the world, executing the missions that preserve the very
freedom you claim to exercise. I have proudly fought for my country in the
skies over Kosovo, Iraq and Afghanistan without regret. Though I
may disagree wholeheartedly with your comments, I will defend to the death
your right to say them in America. But for you to travel to a foreign land
and publicly
criticize our Commander in Chief is cowardice behavior. Would you have so
willingly made those comments while performing for a patriotic, flag-waving
crowd of Texans in Lubbock. I would imagine not. How dare you pocket profits
off songs about soldiers,
their deaths and patriotism while criticizing their Commander in Chief
abroad, even while they prepare to give their lives to ensure your own
freedom of speech. Please ask yourself, what have you done to deserve that
sacrifice? Do not try to justify your comments by claiming that you made
them only because you care about innocent lives. Never once in our history
have we committed troops to war for the purpose of taking innocent lives. We
do it to protect innocent lives, even yours. If the world leaders of the
late 1930's had the vision and courage of our present Commander in
Chief, perhaps the evil men who caused the death of millions in WWII would
have never had the opportunity to harm a soul. The potential loss of
millions of lives in the future at the hands of today's evil mennecessitate
action. In a separate correspondence, I am returning to you each and every
Dixie Chicks CD and
cassette that I have ever purchased. Never again will I allow my funds to
support your behavior. All you have done is to add your name to a growing
list of American "Celebrities" who have failed to realize that they have
obtained their successes on the backs of the American blue-collar workers
such as our servicemen and women.

To Natalie Maines: This Texan, this American will continue to risk his life
to guarantee your freedoms. What will you do to deserve it?

Sincerely,
LT. Layne McDowell
United States Navy

[StormShaman]

I'm sure this will get me flamed--but quite frankly I'm tempted to go out and buy every single album the Dixie Chicks ever made, simply because I support their right to speak their minds (even if I might not agree with everything they say) and want to show that support.

The Dixie Chicks have earned their freedoms by exercising them, and that includes saying stuff that won't be popular with everyone--too bad folks like Lt. McDowell seem unable to realize or appreciate that.

[StormShaman]

I'm sure this will get me flamed--but quite frankly I'm tempted to go out and buy every single album the Dixie Chicks ever made, simply because I support their right to speak their minds (even if I might not agree with everything they say) and want to show that support.

The Dixie Chicks have earned their freedoms by exercising them, and that includes saying stuff that won't be popular with everyone--too bad folks like Lt. McDowell seem unable to realize or appreciate that.

[SouthernHockeyChick]

I agree with Cam. We don't have the freedoms if we're persecuted for exercising them.

[SouthernHockeyChick]

I agree with Cam. We don't have the freedoms if we're persecuted for exercising them.

[Caniac]

I don't begrudge them their right to express themselves. But other people's right to call them idiots should also be allowed to be expressed.

I don't really care one way or the other. I thought they blew before and they still blow now.

[Caniac]

I don't begrudge them their right to express themselves. But other people's right to call them idiots should also be allowed to be expressed.

I don't really care one way or the other. I thought they blew before and they still blow now.

[StormShaman]

I don't begrudge them their right to express themselves. But other people's right to call them idiots should also be allowed to be expressed.

I'm not saying that people aren't allowed to disagree with them. What I take issue with is the implication in that open letter (and similar comments) that their expressing their opinion is wrong and somehow unpatriotic.

It just rubs me the wrong way when people pull that stuff. It bothers me that people have made death threats to Michael Moore for his comments at the Oscars (and it bothers me even more that others are rejoicing/gloating about it), and it bothers me that some morons in Utah thought it would be oh-so-patriotic to "strike a blow for freedom" by taking away Al Jazeera's freedom to report the news (by destroying their English-language website and DDoSing their ISP).

It just seems a little hypocritical to me to talk about freedom while saying or implying that others should be denied theirs simply because they have an unpopular point of view, that's all.

[StormShaman]

I don't begrudge them their right to express themselves. But other people's right to call them idiots should also be allowed to be expressed.

I'm not saying that people aren't allowed to disagree with them. What I take issue with is the implication in that open letter (and similar comments) that their expressing their opinion is wrong and somehow unpatriotic.

It just rubs me the wrong way when people pull that stuff. It bothers me that people have made death threats to Michael Moore for his comments at the Oscars (and it bothers me even more that others are rejoicing/gloating about it), and it bothers me that some morons in Utah thought it would be oh-so-patriotic to "strike a blow for freedom" by taking away Al Jazeera's freedom to report the news (by destroying their English-language website and DDoSing their ISP).

It just seems a little hypocritical to me to talk about freedom while saying or implying that others should be denied theirs simply because they have an unpopular point of view, that's all.

[talkingcanes]

I think the Dixie Chicks and everyone else has the right to say what they think. I also think everyone has to also accept the reactions that come back, positive and negative, as people respond to your opinions. If someone wants to return all their Dixie Chicks CD's then they should do it.

Burning their CD's is another thing and one that I think is as stupid and useless and small minded as burning books.

I do wish she had the nerve to say it here if that's how she feels. She either really believes what she said which is her right or she doesn't. The rapid apology makes me think she wasn't thinking or she doesn't have the strength of her convictions on this one. guess it could also have been a business decision!

[talkingcanes]

I think the Dixie Chicks and everyone else has the right to say what they think. I also think everyone has to also accept the reactions that come back, positive and negative, as people respond to your opinions. If someone wants to return all their Dixie Chicks CD's then they should do it.

Burning their CD's is another thing and one that I think is as stupid and useless and small minded as burning books.

I do wish she had the nerve to say it here if that's how she feels. She either really believes what she said which is her right or she doesn't. The rapid apology makes me think she wasn't thinking or she doesn't have the strength of her convictions on this one. guess it could also have been a business decision!

[JaroFan]

I think the guys point to the letter was that of course she has the right to speak her opinion, but he didn't like that she did it in another country. Of course she's too scared to do it here.

And they've always sucked.

[JaroFan]

I think the guys point to the letter was that of course she has the right to speak her opinion, but he didn't like that she did it in another country. Of course she's too scared to do it here.

And they've always sucked.

[SouthernHockeyChick]

Of course she's too scared to do it here.


That's the problem. Because when people do it here, ie Michael Moore, they get death threats. Similar to when people express unpopular opinions in Iraq.

[SouthernHockeyChick]

Of course she's too scared to do it here.


That's the problem. Because when people do it here, ie Michael Moore, they get death threats. Similar to when people express unpopular opinions in Iraq.

[opuntia]

No, when people express unpopular (or rather anti-government) opinions in Iraq, they get death. Like the Iraqi civilians who are being shot by Iraqi troops for trying to evacuate cities.

[opuntia]

No, when people express unpopular (or rather anti-government) opinions in Iraq, they get death. Like the Iraqi civilians who are being shot by Iraqi troops for trying to evacuate cities.

[JaroFan]

That's the problem. Because when people do it here, ie Michael Moore, they get death threats. Similar to when people express unpopular opinions in Iraq.[/quote]

I think Michael Moore is a little over the top, even to some of my Democrat friends. The guy is still focused on the "fictious" election results. If he'd wake up & realize that if Gore had won his own home state & Clinton's state, Florida wouldn't have been an issue. I think something like Adrian Brody's speech was more appropriate.

And as far as the Al-Jazeera thing, I think we were upset that they openly showed executed POWs, which is a violation of Geneva Convention. And so hackers must say "hands off" their site? They do not present unbiased coverage, no matter what they say. Our government can't regulate what hackers do.

[JaroFan]

That's the problem. Because when people do it here, ie Michael Moore, they get death threats. Similar to when people express unpopular opinions in Iraq.[/quote]

I think Michael Moore is a little over the top, even to some of my Democrat friends. The guy is still focused on the "fictious" election results. If he'd wake up & realize that if Gore had won his own home state & Clinton's state, Florida wouldn't have been an issue. I think something like Adrian Brody's speech was more appropriate.

And as far as the Al-Jazeera thing, I think we were upset that they openly showed executed POWs, which is a violation of Geneva Convention. And so hackers must say "hands off" their site? They do not present unbiased coverage, no matter what they say. Our government can't regulate what hackers do.

[SouthernHockeyChick]

No, when people express unpopular (or rather anti-government) opinions in Iraq, they get death. Like the Iraqi civilians who are being shot by Iraqi troops for trying to evacuate cities.

Similar to when people express unpopular opinions in Iraq.

sim·i·lar
adj.
Related in appearance or nature; alike though not identical.

How "alike though not identical" to Iraq do you want to be?

[SouthernHockeyChick]

No, when people express unpopular (or rather anti-government) opinions in Iraq, they get death. Like the Iraqi civilians who are being shot by Iraqi troops for trying to evacuate cities.

Similar to when people express unpopular opinions in Iraq.

sim·i·lar
adj.
Related in appearance or nature; alike though not identical.

How "alike though not identical" to Iraq do you want to be?

[Caniac]

I'd say that's as far from alike as you get.

[Caniac]

I'd say that's as far from alike as you get.

[SouthernHockeyChick]

I'd say that's as far from alike as you get.

It's much more alike than I am comfortable with. Different degree of persecution, yes, but it's still persecution for expressing your opinions, for taking advantage of the freedoms our troops are giving their lives for.

Disagree with them, yes, all you want and as vehemently as you want. But threatening their lives makes you not much better than those Iraqi troops, IMO.

[SouthernHockeyChick]

I'd say that's as far from alike as you get.

It's much more alike than I am comfortable with. Different degree of persecution, yes, but it's still persecution for expressing your opinions, for taking advantage of the freedoms our troops are giving their lives for.

Disagree with them, yes, all you want and as vehemently as you want. But threatening their lives makes you not much better than those Iraqi troops, IMO.

[JaroFan]

Disagree with them, yes, all you want and as vehemently as you want. But threatening their lives makes you not much better than those Iraqi troops, IMO.[/quote]

I agree with you 100% there. On the flip side, don't forget the protestors sign that read "We support our troops when they kill their officers". They are just as guilty.

[JaroFan]

Disagree with them, yes, all you want and as vehemently as you want. But threatening their lives makes you not much better than those Iraqi troops, IMO.[/quote]

I agree with you 100% there. On the flip side, don't forget the protestors sign that read "We support our troops when they kill their officers". They are just as guilty.

[SouthernHockeyChick]

On the flip side, don't forget the protestors sign that read "We support our troops when they kill their officers". They are just as guilty.

Agree 100% with you there. :)

[SouthernHockeyChick]

On the flip side, don't forget the protestors sign that read "We support our troops when they kill their officers". They are just as guilty.

Agree 100% with you there. :)

[tommy]

The soldiers are quite justified in letters like that. Of course the Dixie Chicks and anyone else have the right to express their opinions. But nowhere in the consitution does it say that your opinion is untouchable. If you're going to say something you have the freedom to say, expect someone else to do the same.

It is not persecution for someone to disagree with your anti-war opinions. People who support the war have just as much of a freedom to disagree with you. Get over it.

Do you realize how demoralizing it would be to go to war, and the last thing you see on the news is millions of your own fellow countrymen and women telling you that you're wasting your time?

Tommy

[tommy]

The soldiers are quite justified in letters like that. Of course the Dixie Chicks and anyone else have the right to express their opinions. But nowhere in the consitution does it say that your opinion is untouchable. If you're going to say something you have the freedom to say, expect someone else to do the same.

It is not persecution for someone to disagree with your anti-war opinions. People who support the war have just as much of a freedom to disagree with you. Get over it.

Do you realize how demoralizing it would be to go to war, and the last thing you see on the news is millions of your own fellow countrymen and women telling you that you're wasting your time?

Tommy

[SouthernHockeyChick]

It is not persecution for someone to disagree with your anti-war opinions. People who support the war have just as much of a freedom to disagree with you.

Death threats are not constitutionally protected.

Here is exactly what Natalie Maines has said:

In London:
"Just so you know," says singer Natalie Maines, "we're ashamed the president of the United States is from Texas."

Later:"We've been overseas for several weeks and have been reading and following the news accounts of our governments' position. The anti-American sentiment that has unfolded here is astounding. While we support our troops, there is nothing more frightening than the notion of going to war with Iraq and the prospect of all the innocent lives that will be lost."

Maines further stated, "I feel the President is ignoring the opinions of many in the U.S. and alienating the rest of the world. My comments were made in frustration and one of the privileges of being an American is you are free to voice your own point of view."


And even later:As a concerned American citizen, I apologize to President Bush because my remark was disrespectful. I feel that whoever holds that office should be treated with the utmost respect. We are currently in Europe and witnessing a huge anti-American sentiment as a result of the perceived rush to war. While war may remain a viable option, as a mother, I just want to see every possible alternative exhausted before children and American soldiers' lives are lost. I love my country. I am a proud American.

[SouthernHockeyChick]

It is not persecution for someone to disagree with your anti-war opinions. People who support the war have just as much of a freedom to disagree with you.

Death threats are not constitutionally protected.

Here is exactly what Natalie Maines has said:

In London:
"Just so you know," says singer Natalie Maines, "we're ashamed the president of the United States is from Texas."

Later:"We've been overseas for several weeks and have been reading and following the news accounts of our governments' position. The anti-American sentiment that has unfolded here is astounding. While we support our troops, there is nothing more frightening than the notion of going to war with Iraq and the prospect of all the innocent lives that will be lost."

Maines further stated, "I feel the President is ignoring the opinions of many in the U.S. and alienating the rest of the world. My comments were made in frustration and one of the privileges of being an American is you are free to voice your own point of view."


And even later:As a concerned American citizen, I apologize to President Bush because my remark was disrespectful. I feel that whoever holds that office should be treated with the utmost respect. We are currently in Europe and witnessing a huge anti-American sentiment as a result of the perceived rush to war. While war may remain a viable option, as a mother, I just want to see every possible alternative exhausted before children and American soldiers' lives are lost. I love my country. I am a proud American.

[tommy]

It is not persecution for someone to disagree with your anti-war opinions. People who support the war have just as much of a freedom to disagree with you.

Death threats are not constitutionally protected.

Yeah, and I DEFINITELY said something about death threats. Yes, people may have threatened Michael Moore, but how stupid of him was it to make a statement like that at the Oscars or whatever? You get what you pay for. It's not like nobody's ever threatened someone else before. I'm NOT justifying death threats, but I'm pointing out that saying things like that get you into bad situations.

[tommy]

It is not persecution for someone to disagree with your anti-war opinions. People who support the war have just as much of a freedom to disagree with you.

Death threats are not constitutionally protected.

Yeah, and I DEFINITELY said something about death threats. Yes, people may have threatened Michael Moore, but how stupid of him was it to make a statement like that at the Oscars or whatever? You get what you pay for. It's not like nobody's ever threatened someone else before. I'm NOT justifying death threats, but I'm pointing out that saying things like that get you into bad situations.

[tommy]

I just want to see every possible alternative exhausted before children and American soldiers' lives are lost. I love my country. I am a proud American.

Exactly how many other options do we have? Sit and wait some more? THAT'S what will cause loss of life here and elsewhere.

[tommy]

I just want to see every possible alternative exhausted before children and American soldiers' lives are lost. I love my country. I am a proud American.

Exactly how many other options do we have? Sit and wait some more? THAT'S what will cause loss of life here and elsewhere.

[SouthernHockeyChick]

Yeah, and I DEFINITELY said something about death threats.

No, but you said this:
It is not persecution for someone to disagree with your anti-war opinions.
and I'm the one who brought up persecution and I was talking about the death threats. I do not think and did not write that disagreeing with someone's opinion was persecution but death threats are. Just felt you may have misunderstood what I said.

As far as Michael Moore goes, you know what you're getting with him. Death threats were completely uncalled for I don't care what he said. Plus, have you seen Bowling for Columbine? His comments were completely appropriate in the context of the film he was winning the award for.

IMO, the minute we stop questioning our leadership in this country and just start agreeing blindly with everything they do rather than looking at everything critically we're doomed. Maybe if the German's had been a little more critical of their country's leadership before WWII something huge could have been avoided. (DISCLAIMER: no comparison is being made between the Holocaust and the current state of our country. It's merely an example.)

[SouthernHockeyChick]

Yeah, and I DEFINITELY said something about death threats.

No, but you said this:
It is not persecution for someone to disagree with your anti-war opinions.
and I'm the one who brought up persecution and I was talking about the death threats. I do not think and did not write that disagreeing with someone's opinion was persecution but death threats are. Just felt you may have misunderstood what I said.

As far as Michael Moore goes, you know what you're getting with him. Death threats were completely uncalled for I don't care what he said. Plus, have you seen Bowling for Columbine? His comments were completely appropriate in the context of the film he was winning the award for.

IMO, the minute we stop questioning our leadership in this country and just start agreeing blindly with everything they do rather than looking at everything critically we're doomed. Maybe if the German's had been a little more critical of their country's leadership before WWII something huge could have been avoided. (DISCLAIMER: no comparison is being made between the Holocaust and the current state of our country. It's merely an example.)

[tommy]

No, but you said this:
It is not persecution for someone to disagree with your anti-war opinions.
and I'm the one who brought up persecution and I was talking about the death threats. I do not think and did not write that disagreeing with someone's opinion was persecution but death threats are. Just felt you may have misunderstood what I said.

Sorry, I hadn't read completely all of the previous posts. My misunderstanding.

IMO, the minute we stop questioning our leadership in this country and just start agreeing blindly with everything they do rather than looking at everything critically we're doomed. Maybe if the German's had been a little more critical of their country's leadership before WWII something huge could have been avoided. (DISCLAIMER: no comparison is being made between the Holocaust and the current state of our country. It's merely an example.)

of course you can't always agree blindly. but people who support the war aren't just doing so because they like bush. personally, I think the horror stories that come from Iraq mean that a change in regime is necessary. I will be the first to tell you, IF Bush does anything to 'steal' lots of oil, I will be totally and completely ashamed. However, I do feel that the liberation of the Iraqis is necessary. THe liberal news stations make it seem as if the Iraqis hate the Americans, and that nobody is welcoming us. THAT is completely false.

Sorry about the argument about the death threats, SHC, like i said, i hadnt completely read everything. Im sorry.

g'dnight everyone, i need to finish my Homework, then off to bed.

[tommy]

No, but you said this:
It is not persecution for someone to disagree with your anti-war opinions.
and I'm the one who brought up persecution and I was talking about the death threats. I do not think and did not write that disagreeing with someone's opinion was persecution but death threats are. Just felt you may have misunderstood what I said.

Sorry, I hadn't read completely all of the previous posts. My misunderstanding.

IMO, the minute we stop questioning our leadership in this country and just start agreeing blindly with everything they do rather than looking at everything critically we're doomed. Maybe if the German's had been a little more critical of their country's leadership before WWII something huge could have been avoided. (DISCLAIMER: no comparison is being made between the Holocaust and the current state of our country. It's merely an example.)

of course you can't always agree blindly. but people who support the war aren't just doing so because they like bush. personally, I think the horror stories that come from Iraq mean that a change in regime is necessary. I will be the first to tell you, IF Bush does anything to 'steal' lots of oil, I will be totally and completely ashamed. However, I do feel that the liberation of the Iraqis is necessary. THe liberal news stations make it seem as if the Iraqis hate the Americans, and that nobody is welcoming us. THAT is completely false.

Sorry about the argument about the death threats, SHC, like i said, i hadnt completely read everything. Im sorry.

g'dnight everyone, i need to finish my Homework, then off to bed.

[SouthernHockeyChick]

No problem at all tommy! :)

of course you can't always agree blindly. but people who support the war aren't just doing so because they like bush.

Oh I know that....that's no more true than that those people who are against the war are only against it for the reason that they do not like Bush. I pretty much agree with everything you've said above there (don't know about that liberal media part but my dad would just say that I am a liberal and therefore am unable to recognize it ;) ).

I'm trying very hard to not argue much how I really feel about the war. I support the troops, I hope we can get Sadaam out of there but that's about all I'm willing to talk about. The only thing I will argue is that absolutely everyone in this country has the right to express their opinions on this war....and to do so without feeling that their safety is threatened. And I think many of the soliders over there feel the same way and understand that that is part of what they are fighting for.

For whatever everyone may think of Michael Moore I'm telling you you should see Bowling for Columbine. He is quite over the top but this movie is a great piece of work examining the reasons that there is so much violence in this country. Definitely deserved the awards it got.

[SouthernHockeyChick]

No problem at all tommy! :)

of course you can't always agree blindly. but people who support the war aren't just doing so because they like bush.

Oh I know that....that's no more true than that those people who are against the war are only against it for the reason that they do not like Bush. I pretty much agree with everything you've said above there (don't know about that liberal media part but my dad would just say that I am a liberal and therefore am unable to recognize it ;) ).

I'm trying very hard to not argue much how I really feel about the war. I support the troops, I hope we can get Sadaam out of there but that's about all I'm willing to talk about. The only thing I will argue is that absolutely everyone in this country has the right to express their opinions on this war....and to do so without feeling that their safety is threatened. And I think many of the soliders over there feel the same way and understand that that is part of what they are fighting for.

For whatever everyone may think of Michael Moore I'm telling you you should see Bowling for Columbine. He is quite over the top but this movie is a great piece of work examining the reasons that there is so much violence in this country. Definitely deserved the awards it got.

[opuntia]

Death threats from a couple of whackos and being exterminated by your own government are pretty dissimilar as far as I can tell.

Appreciate your freedom of speech. Respect the freedom of speech of others (and no, death threats are not freedom of speech). And decide which you trust more: your own government, imperfect as it may be, or another country's.

[opuntia]

Death threats from a couple of whackos and being exterminated by your own government are pretty dissimilar as far as I can tell.

Appreciate your freedom of speech. Respect the freedom of speech of others (and no, death threats are not freedom of speech). And decide which you trust more: your own government, imperfect as it may be, or another country's.

[StormShaman]

Death threats from a couple of whackos and being exterminated by your own government are pretty dissimilar as far as I can tell.

Are they? They both engender fear and are intended to stifle opinions that some consider undesirable--the latter simply takes the former to its logical extreme.

--Camille.

[StormShaman]

Death threats from a couple of whackos and being exterminated by your own government are pretty dissimilar as far as I can tell.

Are they? They both engender fear and are intended to stifle opinions that some consider undesirable--the latter simply takes the former to its logical extreme.

--Camille.

[Caniac]

That's assuming that the aforementioned wacko's make it to power. Checks and balances has done a pretty darned good job keeping that from happening so far, although Ralph Nader tried to put the kaibash on it. ;)

[Caniac]

That's assuming that the aforementioned wacko's make it to power. Checks and balances has done a pretty darned good job keeping that from happening so far, although Ralph Nader tried to put the kaibash on it. ;)

[talkingcanes]

Are they? They both engender fear and are intended to stifle opinions that some consider undesirable--the latter simply takes the former to its logical extreme.

--Camille.


I think they are very different. Any idiot with a phone or a stamp can make a death threat. It would certainly be scary, but not at the level of a death squad sent by your own government to torture and kill you.

[talkingcanes]

Are they? They both engender fear and are intended to stifle opinions that some consider undesirable--the latter simply takes the former to its logical extreme.

--Camille.


I think they are very different. Any idiot with a phone or a stamp can make a death threat. It would certainly be scary, but not at the level of a death squad sent by your own government to torture and kill you.

[JaroFan]

Maines further stated, "I feel the President is ignoring the opinions of many in the U.S. and alienating the rest of the world. My comments were made in frustration and one of the privileges of being an American is you are free to voice your own point of view."




What polls was she looking at? Now our President has to wait for 100% of his country to agree with him to take action?

[JaroFan]

Maines further stated, "I feel the President is ignoring the opinions of many in the U.S. and alienating the rest of the world. My comments were made in frustration and one of the privileges of being an American is you are free to voice your own point of view."




What polls was she looking at? Now our President has to wait for 100% of his country to agree with him to take action?

[tommy]

Are they? They both engender fear and are intended to stifle opinions that some consider undesirable--the latter simply takes the former to its logical extreme.

--Camille.


I think they are very different. Any idiot with a phone or a stamp can make a death threat. It would certainly be scary, but not at the level of a death squad sent by your own government to torture and kill you.

Totally true. There is an insane difference in having some deranged moron tell you he's gonna kill you, and having the president telling you that if you don't agree with him, then he will have his minions take you and torture you, killing you only after total agony.

[tommy]

Are they? They both engender fear and are intended to stifle opinions that some consider undesirable--the latter simply takes the former to its logical extreme.

--Camille.


I think they are very different. Any idiot with a phone or a stamp can make a death threat. It would certainly be scary, but not at the level of a death squad sent by your own government to torture and kill you.

Totally true. There is an insane difference in having some deranged moron tell you he's gonna kill you, and having the president telling you that if you don't agree with him, then he will have his minions take you and torture you, killing you only after total agony.

[nccanes]

Maines further stated, "I feel the President is ignoring the opinions of many in the U.S. and alienating the rest of the world. My comments were made in frustration and one of the privileges of being an American is you are free to voice your own point of view."


What polls was she looking at? Now our President has to wait for 100% of his country to agree with him to take action?

Of course not. But her statement is true. Many Americans are concerned about the resulting relationships with the rest of the world. Many Americans, while supporting our troops 100%, differ in the opinion that now was the time to invade, etc.

It appears to me that the Dixie Chicks are basically the ones taking the brunt of anger/disgust for "people in the public eye". Certainly there are scads of "public people" that share their views and aren't facing boycotts of their craft, etc. Maines just made it easy for people to target them.

[nccanes]

Maines further stated, "I feel the President is ignoring the opinions of many in the U.S. and alienating the rest of the world. My comments were made in frustration and one of the privileges of being an American is you are free to voice your own point of view."


What polls was she looking at? Now our President has to wait for 100% of his country to agree with him to take action?

Of course not. But her statement is true. Many Americans are concerned about the resulting relationships with the rest of the world. Many Americans, while supporting our troops 100%, differ in the opinion that now was the time to invade, etc.

It appears to me that the Dixie Chicks are basically the ones taking the brunt of anger/disgust for "people in the public eye". Certainly there are scads of "public people" that share their views and aren't facing boycotts of their craft, etc. Maines just made it easy for people to target them.

[JaroFan]

I do agree that there are many, but even before the invasion, 70% supported military action.

[JaroFan]

I do agree that there are many, but even before the invasion, 70% supported military action.

[nccanes]

I do agree that there are many, but even before the invasion, 70% supported military action.

Maines said "many", not "majority".

[nccanes]

I do agree that there are many, but even before the invasion, 70% supported military action.

Maines said "many", not "majority".

[Guyute]

I've been avoiding this one (the issue of what the D.C.'s said), because I'm having trouble finding exactly how I want to say what I want to say... so I'm not saying it.

but- re: military action.

I just don't get what people wanted? to sit back and let them come to us? in our cities? in our workplaces? do you think they wouldn't?

for those of you that doubted the connection between the Al-Queda and Saddam... do you still doubt it? There are Bin Laden's people fighting along side Saddam's guard. suicide bombers. human shields. please, remember what happened in nyc.

sitting back while waiting for Saddam to turn over his wmd's was an utter joke. sitting back waiting for some countries to agree to go in with us was also a joke.

I know this thread is mostly about the argument of free speech. but, it has bordered on the for/against war issue as well... which I have no problem speaking to.

[Guyute]

I've been avoiding this one (the issue of what the D.C.'s said), because I'm having trouble finding exactly how I want to say what I want to say... so I'm not saying it.

but- re: military action.

I just don't get what people wanted? to sit back and let them come to us? in our cities? in our workplaces? do you think they wouldn't?

for those of you that doubted the connection between the Al-Queda and Saddam... do you still doubt it? There are Bin Laden's people fighting along side Saddam's guard. suicide bombers. human shields. please, remember what happened in nyc.

sitting back while waiting for Saddam to turn over his wmd's was an utter joke. sitting back waiting for some countries to agree to go in with us was also a joke.

I know this thread is mostly about the argument of free speech. but, it has bordered on the for/against war issue as well... which I have no problem speaking to.

[nccanes]

Guy, I really don't know what my feelings are on pro/con war. For me it is a very complicated issue that I struggle with greatly. To me it is an intensely personal issue/decision, that I know won't be influenced by other folks (The Dixie Chicks or people I know). Now do I think slamming Bush in the manner she did was wise, probably not. Do I think the backlash was overkill, probably so.

Anyway. Since the comment was made that 70% of the population favored an invasion, I did some checking.

According to Gallup:

POLL ANALYSES
1/13/2003
Many Americans Wary of War With Iraq, Just as in 1991
But almost 8 out of 10 believe the United States would win such a war

Only about half of the American public feels that the situation regarding Iraq is worth going to war over, a sentiment that is very similar to the prevailing attitude just prior to the initiation of military action against Iraq in 1991. Americans in 1991 felt that the war would be short, but were less certain about the possible casualties that would result. Today, Americans are more likely to predict a longer war against Iraq, but are more positive that casualties would be limited. Now, as was true then, a significant majority of Americans are optimistic that the United States and its allies would win a war against Iraq.


and again from Gallup:

POLL ANALYSES
2/11/2003
Public Rallying Around Bush's Call for War
But less than majority support war without new U.N. vote

In the wake of Secretary of State Colin L. Powell's appearance before the United Nations Security Council last week, as well as President George W. Bush's speech to the nation the week before, public support for war against Iraq appears to be on the rise, according to the latest CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll. Americans are now more likely to say that Iraq is obstructing U.N. weapons inspectors, has facilities to create weapons of mass destruction, and has biological or chemical weapons. The public is also more inclined than they have been to believe that the Bush administration has a clear and well-thought-out policy on Iraq. At the same time, Americans remain unconvinced that Iraq represents an immediate threat to the United States, and only four in 10 are willing for the United States to invade Iraq without a new authorizing vote by the U.N. Security Council.


and again:

POLL ANALYSES
2/28/2003Public Support for Invasion of Iraq Holds Steady
Fifty-nine percent in favor of invading Iraq

A new CNN/USA Today/Gallup Poll shows 59% of Americans in favor of invading Iraq with ground troops in an attempt to remove Saddam Hussein from power. That level of support is unchanged from last week, and is generally similar to what it has been for months. Roughly half of the public says their mind is made up on invading Iraq, while about half say they could change their mind. The outcome of the U.N. debate on Iraq remains pivotal to Americans' thinking about Iraq. Thirty-eight percent of Americans favor an invasion even if the United Nations does not approve the new resolution that would authorize war, but 40% oppose an invasion if such a resolution is not forthcoming.


and more:

POLL ANALYSES
March 24, 2003
Seventy-Two Percent of Americans Support War Against Iraq
Bush approval up 13 points to 71%
by Frank Newport
GALLUP NEWS SERVICE

Seventy-two percent of Americans interviewed in a new CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll conducted Saturday and Sunday favor the war against Iraq, while 25% are opposed. Roughly the same number approve of the job President George W. Bush is doing.

The percentage supporting the war is just slightly lower than the 76% approval registered last Thursday night -- the day after hostilities began -- but remains significantly higher than support levels in the weeks and months leading up to the beginning of hostilities. Approval levels for the concept of war had been running in the high 50% range in the months leading up to last week. Support increased to 66% on Monday night, March 17, after President Bush made his "ultimatum" speech in which he pledged military action if Saddam Hussein did not leave Iraq, and, as noted, jumped to 76% on Thursday night.

The level of support for the war against Iraq is slightly more muted than was the case just after the first Persian Gulf War began in January 1991. At that time, 80% of Americans supported the decision to begin the air war in the effort to drive the Iraqis out of Kuwait.

Both those who support and those who oppose the current war say they hold their views strongly. Out of the total of 72% who favor the military action, about four in five (59% of all Americans) say they support it strongly. At the other end of the spectrum, of the 25% who oppose military action, roughly two-thirds (17% of all Americans) oppose it strongly.


There is some interesting stuff on the website, for those interested (http://www.gallup.com).

[nccanes]

Guy, I really don't know what my feelings are on pro/con war. For me it is a very complicated issue that I struggle with greatly. To me it is an intensely personal issue/decision, that I know won't be influenced by other folks (The Dixie Chicks or people I know). Now do I think slamming Bush in the manner she did was wise, probably not. Do I think the backlash was overkill, probably so.

Anyway. Since the comment was made that 70% of the population favored an invasion, I did some checking.

According to Gallup:

POLL ANALYSES
1/13/2003
Many Americans Wary of War With Iraq, Just as in 1991
But almost 8 out of 10 believe the United States would win such a war

Only about half of the American public feels that the situation regarding Iraq is worth going to war over, a sentiment that is very similar to the prevailing attitude just prior to the initiation of military action against Iraq in 1991. Americans in 1991 felt that the war would be short, but were less certain about the possible casualties that would result. Today, Americans are more likely to predict a longer war against Iraq, but are more positive that casualties would be limited. Now, as was true then, a significant majority of Americans are optimistic that the United States and its allies would win a war against Iraq.


and again from Gallup:

POLL ANALYSES
2/11/2003
Public Rallying Around Bush's Call for War
But less than majority support war without new U.N. vote

In the wake of Secretary of State Colin L. Powell's appearance before the United Nations Security Council last week, as well as President George W. Bush's speech to the nation the week before, public support for war against Iraq appears to be on the rise, according to the latest CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll. Americans are now more likely to say that Iraq is obstructing U.N. weapons inspectors, has facilities to create weapons of mass destruction, and has biological or chemical weapons. The public is also more inclined than they have been to believe that the Bush administration has a clear and well-thought-out policy on Iraq. At the same time, Americans remain unconvinced that Iraq represents an immediate threat to the United States, and only four in 10 are willing for the United States to invade Iraq without a new authorizing vote by the U.N. Security Council.


and again:

POLL ANALYSES
2/28/2003Public Support for Invasion of Iraq Holds Steady
Fifty-nine percent in favor of invading Iraq

A new CNN/USA Today/Gallup Poll shows 59% of Americans in favor of invading Iraq with ground troops in an attempt to remove Saddam Hussein from power. That level of support is unchanged from last week, and is generally similar to what it has been for months. Roughly half of the public says their mind is made up on invading Iraq, while about half say they could change their mind. The outcome of the U.N. debate on Iraq remains pivotal to Americans' thinking about Iraq. Thirty-eight percent of Americans favor an invasion even if the United Nations does not approve the new resolution that would authorize war, but 40% oppose an invasion if such a resolution is not forthcoming.


and more:

POLL ANALYSES
March 24, 2003
Seventy-Two Percent of Americans Support War Against Iraq
Bush approval up 13 points to 71%
by Frank Newport
GALLUP NEWS SERVICE

Seventy-two percent of Americans interviewed in a new CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll conducted Saturday and Sunday favor the war against Iraq, while 25% are opposed. Roughly the same number approve of the job President George W. Bush is doing.

The percentage supporting the war is just slightly lower than the 76% approval registered last Thursday night -- the day after hostilities began -- but remains significantly higher than support levels in the weeks and months leading up to the beginning of hostilities. Approval levels for the concept of war had been running in the high 50% range in the months leading up to last week. Support increased to 66% on Monday night, March 17, after President Bush made his "ultimatum" speech in which he pledged military action if Saddam Hussein did not leave Iraq, and, as noted, jumped to 76% on Thursday night.

The level of support for the war against Iraq is slightly more muted than was the case just after the first Persian Gulf War began in January 1991. At that time, 80% of Americans supported the decision to begin the air war in the effort to drive the Iraqis out of Kuwait.

Both those who support and those who oppose the current war say they hold their views strongly. Out of the total of 72% who favor the military action, about four in five (59% of all Americans) say they support it strongly. At the other end of the spectrum, of the 25% who oppose military action, roughly two-thirds (17% of all Americans) oppose it strongly.


There is some interesting stuff on the website, for those interested (http://www.gallup.com).

[Shell]

Just got this as a forward from one of my old army customers...

I see a lot of people yelling for peace but I have not heard of one plan for peace.

Here's the plan:

1) The US will apologize to the world for our "interference" in their affairs, past & present. You know, Hitler, Mussolini and the rest of them 'good old boys'. We will never "interfere" again.

2) We will withdraw our troops from all over the world, starting with Germany, South Korea and the Philippines. They don't want us there. We would station troops at our borders. No more sneaking through holes in the fence.

3) All illegal aliens have 90 days to get their affairs together and leave. We'll give them a free trip home. After 90 days the remainder will be gathered up and deported immediately, regardless of who or where they are.
France would welcome them.

4) All future visitors will be thoroughly checked and limited to 90 days unless given a special permit. No one from a terrorist nation would be allowed in. If you don't like it there, change it yourself, don't hide here. Asylum would not ever be available to anyone. We don't need any more cab drivers.

5) No "students" over age 21. The older ones are the bombers. If they don't attend classes, they get a "D" and it's back home baby.

6) The US will make a strong effort to become self sufficient energy wise. This will include developing non polluting sources of energy but will require a temporary drilling of oil in the Alaskan wilderness. The caribou will have to cope for a while.

7) Offer Saudi Arabia and other oil producing countries $10 a barrel for their oil. If they don't like it, we go someplace else.

8) If there is a famine or other natural catastrophe in the world, we will not "interfere". They can pray to Allah or whomever, for seeds, rain, cement or whatever they need. Besides' most of what we give them is stolen or given to the army. The people who need it most get very little, if any anyway.

9) Ship the UN Headquarters to an island some place. We don't need the spies and fair weather friends here. Besides, it would make a good homeless shelter or lockup for illegal aliens.

10) All Americans must go to charm and beauty school. That way, no one can call us "Ugly Americans" any longer.

[Shell]

Just got this as a forward from one of my old army customers...

I see a lot of people yelling for peace but I have not heard of one plan for peace.

Here's the plan:

1) The US will apologize to the world for our "interference" in their affairs, past & present. You know, Hitler, Mussolini and the rest of them 'good old boys'. We will never "interfere" again.

2) We will withdraw our troops from all over the world, starting with Germany, South Korea and the Philippines. They don't want us there. We would station troops at our borders. No more sneaking through holes in the fence.

3) All illegal aliens have 90 days to get their affairs together and leave. We'll give them a free trip home. After 90 days the remainder will be gathered up and deported immediately, regardless of who or where they are.
France would welcome them.

4) All future visitors will be thoroughly checked and limited to 90 days unless given a special permit. No one from a terrorist nation would be allowed in. If you don't like it there, change it yourself, don't hide here. Asylum would not ever be available to anyone. We don't need any more cab drivers.

5) No "students" over age 21. The older ones are the bombers. If they don't attend classes, they get a "D" and it's back home baby.

6) The US will make a strong effort to become self sufficient energy wise. This will include developing non polluting sources of energy but will require a temporary drilling of oil in the Alaskan wilderness. The caribou will have to cope for a while.

7) Offer Saudi Arabia and other oil producing countries $10 a barrel for their oil. If they don't like it, we go someplace else.

8) If there is a famine or other natural catastrophe in the world, we will not "interfere". They can pray to Allah or whomever, for seeds, rain, cement or whatever they need. Besides' most of what we give them is stolen or given to the army. The people who need it most get very little, if any anyway.

9) Ship the UN Headquarters to an island some place. We don't need the spies and fair weather friends here. Besides, it would make a good homeless shelter or lockup for illegal aliens.

10) All Americans must go to charm and beauty school. That way, no one can call us "Ugly Americans" any longer.

[Guyute]

http://kit.netpoets.net/standovation.gif http://www.tridead.net/forums/images/smilies/thumb.gif http://www.tridead.net/forums/images/smilies/thumb.gif

[Guyute]

http://kit.netpoets.net/standovation.gif http://www.tridead.net/forums/images/smilies/thumb.gif http://www.tridead.net/forums/images/smilies/thumb.gif

[tommy]

:D :D :D :cool: :cool: :cool: :spin: :spin: :spin: :smoke: :smoke: :smoke:

[tommy]

:D :D :D :cool: :cool: :cool: :spin: :spin: :spin: :smoke: :smoke: :smoke:

[JaroFan]

Exellent post, Shell! :cool:

[JaroFan]

Exellent post, Shell! :cool:

[Shell]

So I have to say, I am pretty freakin annoyed with our media right now. It is absolutely wonderful that Jessica Lynch was rescued. I am Thrilled for her and her family... however, I am perturbed that I have heard 0 mention of those guys that were with her that are still POWs. Not one word. I've heard the story on CNN and MSNBC as well as read several articles and nothing. I get the feeling that she was somehow more important because she is a female. I definitely think that women who are so inclined should be allowed to join the armed forces. I do not think they should get any special treatment there however. Those men who are still POWs cannot be forgotten.

[Shell]

So I have to say, I am pretty freakin annoyed with our media right now. It is absolutely wonderful that Jessica Lynch was rescued. I am Thrilled for her and her family... however, I am perturbed that I have heard 0 mention of those guys that were with her that are still POWs. Not one word. I've heard the story on CNN and MSNBC as well as read several articles and nothing. I get the feeling that she was somehow more important because she is a female. I definitely think that women who are so inclined should be allowed to join the armed forces. I do not think they should get any special treatment there however. Those men who are still POWs cannot be forgotten.

[opuntia]

No, no, no, what I heard was that they got word from an informant that she was being treated for bullet wounds in a hospital, and it was a place where they could get to her. If any of the other POWs were there, we'd have freed them too. She was not given special treatment for being female (there is still at least one other female POW); she just happened to be accessible.

[opuntia]

No, no, no, what I heard was that they got word from an informant that she was being treated for bullet wounds in a hospital, and it was a place where they could get to her. If any of the other POWs were there, we'd have freed them too. She was not given special treatment for being female (there is still at least one other female POW); she just happened to be accessible.

[Shell]

OK, so a ban of the dixie chicks is pretty easy.. how about now that a good band is doing it though? ;)
(as a disclaimer I don't know anything of the dixie chicks other than the fleetwood mac song they do). This was way worse, and I am curious to see what the backlash is.

Concert-goers head to exits after anti-Bush display
By Mark Brown, Rocky Mountain News
April 3, 2003

Incensed fans walked out of Pearl Jam's concert Tuesday after lead singer Eddie Vedder impaled a mask of President Bush on a microphone stand, then slammed it to the stage.

Most of Vedder's antiwar remarks earlier in the Pepsi Center show were greeted with mixed cheers and scattered boos. But dozens of angry fans walked out during the encore because of the macabre display with the Bush mask, which he wore for the song Bushleaguer, a Bush- taunting song from the band's latest album, Riot Act.

"When he was sharing his political views in a fairly benign manner - supporting our troops, opposing policy - that's OK," said Keith Zimmerman, of Denver.

"When he takes what looks like the head of George Bush on a stick, then throws it to the stage and stomps on it, that's just unacceptable. I love Pearl Jam, but that was just way over the edge. We literally got up and left."

Others joined Zimmerman, some complaining about the lyrics of Bushleaguer, which in part call Bush "a confidence man" and say, "He's not a leader / he's a Texas leaguer."

"I wasn't sure if it was really happening," said Kim Mueller. "We looked at each other and realized he really did have George Bush's head on a stick and was waving it in the air, then slam-med it to the ground and step-ped on it."

"It was like he decapitated someone in a primal ritual and stuck their head on a stick," Zimmerman said. "It kinda blows away the Dixie Chicks."

The Dixie Chicks were the target of boycotts and bannings after making an anti-Bush statement on a London stage in March. (On Wednesday, the Marshall Tucker Band announced it would play a May 1 concert in Spartanburg, S.C., as an alternative to the U.S. tour-opening show in nearby Greenville by the Dixie Chicks that same day.)

Vedder has used the Bush mask in previous shows in Australia and Japan, but Denver's U.S. tour opener was the first show since war broke out in Iraq.

Pearl Jam manager Kelly Curtis couldn't be reached for comment. The Seattle band plays Oklahoma City tonight.

Before Do the Evolution, Vedder told the crowd the tale of a Vietnam vet who expressed severe reservations about war in Iraq to Vedder. The singer was incensed when someone in the crowd yelled, "Shut up!"

"Did someone just say, 'Shut up'? I don't know if you heard about this thing called freedom of speech, man. It's worth thinking about it, because it's going away," Vedder said. "In the last year of being able to use it, we're sure as (expletive) going to use it and I'm not gonna apologize."

Later in the show, he added to that.

"Just to clarify . . . we support the troops," Vedder said to cheers. "Our problem is certainly not with anybody over there doing something that not too many of us would do right now, not for these reasons.

"So to the families and those people who know those folks and are related to those folks and are married to those folks, we send our support. We're just confused on how wanting to bring them back safely all of a sudden becomes nonsupport. We love them, we support them. They're not the ones who make the foreign policy. . . . Let's hope for the best and speak our opinions."

It was after that when Vedder put on the Bush mask and a sparkling silver jacket. He took off the mask, mounted it on the mike stand, then slammed it to the floor.

[Shell]

OK, so a ban of the dixie chicks is pretty easy.. how about now that a good band is doing it though? ;)
(as a disclaimer I don't know anything of the dixie chicks other than the fleetwood mac song they do). This was way worse, and I am curious to see what the backlash is.

Concert-goers head to exits after anti-Bush display
By Mark Brown, Rocky Mountain News
April 3, 2003

Incensed fans walked out of Pearl Jam's concert Tuesday after lead singer Eddie Vedder impaled a mask of President Bush on a microphone stand, then slammed it to the stage.

Most of Vedder's antiwar remarks earlier in the Pepsi Center show were greeted with mixed cheers and scattered boos. But dozens of angry fans walked out during the encore because of the macabre display with the Bush mask, which he wore for the song Bushleaguer, a Bush- taunting song from the band's latest album, Riot Act.

"When he was sharing his political views in a fairly benign manner - supporting our troops, opposing policy - that's OK," said Keith Zimmerman, of Denver.

"When he takes what looks like the head of George Bush on a stick, then throws it to the stage and stomps on it, that's just unacceptable. I love Pearl Jam, but that was just way over the edge. We literally got up and left."

Others joined Zimmerman, some complaining about the lyrics of Bushleaguer, which in part call Bush "a confidence man" and say, "He's not a leader / he's a Texas leaguer."

"I wasn't sure if it was really happening," said Kim Mueller. "We looked at each other and realized he really did have George Bush's head on a stick and was waving it in the air, then slam-med it to the ground and step-ped on it."

"It was like he decapitated someone in a primal ritual and stuck their head on a stick," Zimmerman said. "It kinda blows away the Dixie Chicks."

The Dixie Chicks were the target of boycotts and bannings after making an anti-Bush statement on a London stage in March. (On Wednesday, the Marshall Tucker Band announced it would play a May 1 concert in Spartanburg, S.C., as an alternative to the U.S. tour-opening show in nearby Greenville by the Dixie Chicks that same day.)

Vedder has used the Bush mask in previous shows in Australia and Japan, but Denver's U.S. tour opener was the first show since war broke out in Iraq.

Pearl Jam manager Kelly Curtis couldn't be reached for comment. The Seattle band plays Oklahoma City tonight.

Before Do the Evolution, Vedder told the crowd the tale of a Vietnam vet who expressed severe reservations about war in Iraq to Vedder. The singer was incensed when someone in the crowd yelled, "Shut up!"

"Did someone just say, 'Shut up'? I don't know if you heard about this thing called freedom of speech, man. It's worth thinking about it, because it's going away," Vedder said. "In the last year of being able to use it, we're sure as (expletive) going to use it and I'm not gonna apologize."

Later in the show, he added to that.

"Just to clarify . . . we support the troops," Vedder said to cheers. "Our problem is certainly not with anybody over there doing something that not too many of us would do right now, not for these reasons.

"So to the families and those people who know those folks and are related to those folks and are married to those folks, we send our support. We're just confused on how wanting to bring them back safely all of a sudden becomes nonsupport. We love them, we support them. They're not the ones who make the foreign policy. . . . Let's hope for the best and speak our opinions."

It was after that when Vedder put on the Bush mask and a sparkling silver jacket. He took off the mask, mounted it on the mike stand, then slammed it to the floor.

[Alicia]

Wow Eddie, extreme any?

[Alicia]

Wow Eddie, extreme any?

[Shell]

yeah, no kidding.. I'm not much for lines, but that was sooooooo over the line I don't know what to say!

[Shell]

yeah, no kidding.. I'm not much for lines, but that was sooooooo over the line I don't know what to say!

[Alicia]

yeah, no kidding.. I'm not much for lines, but that was sooooooo over the line I don't know what to say!

I love me some Eddie Vedder, but he does have a tendency to be a little much sometimes.

[Alicia]

yeah, no kidding.. I'm not much for lines, but that was sooooooo over the line I don't know what to say!

I love me some Eddie Vedder, but he does have a tendency to be a little much sometimes.

[JaroFan]

Pearl Jam's sucked since Vitalogy anyway. Guess i won't be attending their concert.

[JaroFan]

Pearl Jam's sucked since Vitalogy anyway. Guess i won't be attending their concert.

[randakk]

If there ever was a worthless waste of a 'musician', Vedder it is. That's all just an opinion, of course, but until he can prove either that he can sing worth a crap or that he isn't a complete moron, there my opinion will remain.

Not that he cares one iota what my opinion is, but there you have it. Dudeman's a bloody joke.

[randakk]

If there ever was a worthless waste of a 'musician', Vedder it is. That's all just an opinion, of course, but until he can prove either that he can sing worth a crap or that he isn't a complete moron, there my opinion will remain.

Not that he cares one iota what my opinion is, but there you have it. Dudeman's a bloody joke.

[JaroFan]

I think this might do him in. If Pearl Jam fans, who are generally laid back, walk out on him then who's left to listen?

[JaroFan]

I think this might do him in. If Pearl Jam fans, who are generally laid back, walk out on him then who's left to listen?

[Alicia]

If there ever was a worthless waste of a 'musician', Vedder it is. That's all just an opinion, of course, but until he can prove either that he can sing worth a crap or that he isn't a complete moron, there my opinion will remain.

Not that he cares one iota what my opinion is, but there you have it. Dudeman's a bloody joke.

I still like him, but actions of late, I must agree w/you here.

[Alicia]

If there ever was a worthless waste of a 'musician', Vedder it is. That's all just an opinion, of course, but until he can prove either that he can sing worth a crap or that he isn't a complete moron, there my opinion will remain.

Not that he cares one iota what my opinion is, but there you have it. Dudeman's a bloody joke.

I still like him, but actions of late, I must agree w/you here.

[Stormbringer]

Pearl Jam's sucked since Vitalogy anyway. Guess i won't be attending their concert.

If there ever was a worthless waste of a 'musician', Vedder it is. That's all just an opinion, of course, but until he can prove either that he can sing worth a crap or that he isn't a complete moron, there my opinion will remain.

Not that he cares one iota what my opinion is, but there you have it. Dudeman's a bloody joke.

Wholeheartedly agree on both accounts. I've never been much of a fan of Pearl Jam, except for a few songs off of Ten ("Even Flow", "Jeremy", "Alive", and "Black") and Vitology ("Better Man"). And IMO, no offense to those who do like or have liked Pearl Jam, but they were always overrated in my book...even when they collaborated with Neil Young, they didn't put out anything that great (I'll never forget how much "Downtown" off of Mirror Ball truly grated on my nerves in its heyday, and it still does not cease to annoy...). Out of all the songs that I mentioned that I somewhat like by Vedder and Co., "Better Man" is really the only one I find myself kind of enjoying when it comes on the radio. Though "comes" may become "came" thanks to Vedder's curt, cruel, and stupid actions. And thanks to those actions, I don't think I'll miss "Better Man" or any Pearl Jam song all that much...

[Stormbringer]

Pearl Jam's sucked since Vitalogy anyway. Guess i won't be attending their concert.

If there ever was a worthless waste of a 'musician', Vedder it is. That's all just an opinion, of course, but until he can prove either that he can sing worth a crap or that he isn't a complete moron, there my opinion will remain.

Not that he cares one iota what my opinion is, but there you have it. Dudeman's a bloody joke.

Wholeheartedly agree on both accounts. I've never been much of a fan of Pearl Jam, except for a few songs off of Ten ("Even Flow", "Jeremy", "Alive", and "Black") and Vitology ("Better Man"). And IMO, no offense to those who do like or have liked Pearl Jam, but they were always overrated in my book...even when they collaborated with Neil Young, they didn't put out anything that great (I'll never forget how much "Downtown" off of Mirror Ball truly grated on my nerves in its heyday, and it still does not cease to annoy...). Out of all the songs that I mentioned that I somewhat like by Vedder and Co., "Better Man" is really the only one I find myself kind of enjoying when it comes on the radio. Though "comes" may become "came" thanks to Vedder's curt, cruel, and stupid actions. And thanks to those actions, I don't think I'll miss "Better Man" or any Pearl Jam song all that much...

[crazy4canes]

Sheesh. I would have walked out too. A bit over-the-top, imo. :roll:

Have a little respect dudeman. <---that's for you mo. :beatup:

[crazy4canes]

Sheesh. I would have walked out too. A bit over-the-top, imo. :roll:

Have a little respect dudeman. <---that's for you mo. :beatup:

[Jeff O Rocks]

People in the public eye can have their opinions on matters, but they need to realize that everything they say...everyone hears!! and when they look like a horse's ass...the whole world sees it.. :mad:

I don't like the war either..and any wound or death is so tragic, but I think at this point something had to be done...I just pray for the safe keeping of our soldiers and hope that this will be over soon!!

[Jeff O Rocks]

People in the public eye can have their opinions on matters, but they need to realize that everything they say...everyone hears!! and when they look like a horse's ass...the whole world sees it.. :mad:

I don't like the war either..and any wound or death is so tragic, but I think at this point something had to be done...I just pray for the safe keeping of our soldiers and hope that this will be over soon!!

[rkbrasse]

This may completely be off topic but I've never seen a band last as long or garner as many fans off of the merit of one good album in my life. I really loved "Ten". Definitely a ground breaking album for me personally. It was as much of an ?anthem to my generation" as I can find in those days. But hey there is no accounting for taste.

My opinions above were formed long before Vedeer's latest acts. I was even considering attending one of their shows this summer. I?ll probably pass. Not because he demonstrates dissatisfaction with the current government but because they have only touched on what they had occasionally since "Ten". (See the singles soundtrack, ?Breath? Specifically)

Now I was never truly certain that we should be in Iraq until I heard about what Hussain's son did to the Olympic athletes. This regime that exists in Iraq is horrible and we should be ashamed that the US didn?t do more before now. As human beings we could not let that continue. If people can?t see that then they need to take their blinders off.

Anyway just my two cents.

[rkbrasse]

This may completely be off topic but I've never seen a band last as long or garner as many fans off of the merit of one good album in my life. I really loved "Ten". Definitely a ground breaking album for me personally. It was as much of an ?anthem to my generation" as I can find in those days. But hey there is no accounting for taste.

My opinions above were formed long before Vedeer's latest acts. I was even considering attending one of their shows this summer. I?ll probably pass. Not because he demonstrates dissatisfaction with the current government but because they have only touched on what they had occasionally since "Ten". (See the singles soundtrack, ?Breath? Specifically)

Now I was never truly certain that we should be in Iraq until I heard about what Hussain's son did to the Olympic athletes. This regime that exists in Iraq is horrible and we should be ashamed that the US didn?t do more before now. As human beings we could not let that continue. If people can?t see that then they need to take their blinders off.

Anyway just my two cents.