Cindy,

Ritter's article, originally posted in truthdig.com is here.

http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/08/01/2898/

We look forward to seeing you in Pittsburgh this November. Your acceptance of the Thomas Merton Award means a lot to us!

We lost our two sons too Cindy, we do know how it is.

After time, the pain lessens, the wound never fully heals. We don't want anyone else to ever know how it is.

It is Conyers who is even more guilty than Pelosi in my mind. He can begin the impeachment process no matter waht Pelosi says now, he has the bill on his desk. Of course if she told him to act he wouuld. They are both guilty.

You get the sense if Cindy won Pelosi's seat, that a lot that never gets said would finally get said in the one place where nobody wants to hear it said. Our government. Later... she can run for president...! We could use her.

Thank you yet again Cindy for all your insight. By the way, is this campaign for Congress in the Democratic primary against Pelosi?

As long as capitalism exists so will war. Death has become the most profitable enterprise in history. The devout capitalist has no conscience, is not troubled by morality or ethics and lives only for profit.
We can't fix the problems of America, or humanity in general, until we can cure the disease of greed. Until we learn to share we will continue to kill.

There is also the dubious distinction that NATO troops have killed more civilians in Afghanistan than the Taliban so far this year .....

As a woman and long-time peace activist, I cannot imagine the BONDS that soldiers feel. However, to USE this sense of comraderie to serve a lethal purpose is an inversion of an ideal of brotherhood. It's a sad travesty that these young people identify with fealty to one another, and put their lives on the line for NOTHING of substance. Any honor thus attached is tainted by its extension in pursuit of a dark objective (that orchestrated by their superior officers sending these unfortunates into the latest designated killing fields.)

Cindy, your lucid and eloquent comments are always a pleasure to read. I ought to qualify "pleasure", insofar as you write on apolcalyptic issues and events that are grave and heartbreaking. But I thought you might appreciate knowing that this reader, at least, finds your insights keen and invigorating-- the proverbial breath of fresh air.

I also was never able to buy in to the simplistic view that Afghanistan was a righteous military operation-- a good war, or at least a "rational" war. I believe that the support for this war by liberals and progressives may have been skewed by a misplaced relativism: compared to the nakedly illegal and deleterious wanton war of aggression in Iraq, and the abominable toxic tsunami of government mendaciousness attending its obscene birth, the Afghanistan adventure seemed straightforward and clean by comparison. Since its dubious inception, the criticism of the US in Afghanistan has been mostly tactical.

My testosterone must not be good for much beyond sexual energy, because unlike ordinary red-blooded Americans such as David Letterman and Thomas Friedman, I wasn't hankerin' to hit something hard after the events of 9/11. So Afghanistan didn't release any pent-up aggression for me, and I wasn't impressed by the signature peremptory policy of the chickenhawk administration to reject diplomacy in favor of kicking ass, or at any rate trying to. I recall some attempts at dialogue with the Afghan government over the alleged presence of bin Laden and al-Quaeda terrorists in their country, but any such "jawing" was ruled out on the grounds that the Afghans were manifestly duplicitous, untrustworthy, and acting in bad faith. You know, the polar opposite of the US.

And I find that in order to be comfortable with the so-called War in Afghanistan, it helps to implicitly buy into the Official Story of the events of 9/11, at least insofar as accepting the two-dimensional characterization of Osama bin Laden as a comic-book or James Bond-style Super-Villain, and believing that he was the sole architect and executive in the ostensible airline hijackings and subsequent destruction. I'm not visiting the vexed question of "The Truth of 9/11" here, just noting that it's possible to keep an open mind on the subject and believe that there is much that is unknown and undisclosed about that day.

Once one accepts that bin Laden is a notorious outlaw who somehow escaped with his gang and are hiding up in Hole in the Wall, it's a short jump to the righteous belief that, by God, a posse needs to go out there and bring him back to be hung after a short trial! And if the local Native tribes are shielding or protecting this monster, then by God, we may need to take a few scalps of our own just to help them see reason! And then there's always good old collateral damage, including an unfortunate proliferation of retail and wholesale slaughter of innocent bystanders.

But once one rationalizes the necessity of this kind of enterprise, one must inevitably maintain optimism by inventing more elaborate rationalizations to bolster the original shaky premise. Yet omehow it always ends up as The Ox-Bow Incident, with supporters reduced to darkly muttering afterwards that at least we were trying to do the right thing.

So here we are. I hope that indeed the public will come to see that we need to extricate ourselves from our entangling follies in Afghanistan as well as in Iraq.

Keep up the good work, and never mind Scott Ritter. ;)

HOW ABOUT WE JUST STOP FUNDING THE WAR . . . .
AND BRING THE TROOPS HOME . . . ??????

Hi Cindy --

Yeah, our "free press" hasn't been doing much to point out the insanities of our supposed bringing of democracy to Afghanistan . . . while drug production is at a new PEAK and women are suffering more than ever!!!!

An oil industry in private hands and drug production which is perhaps even more profitable than the black gold is something our MSM doesn't want to discuss. We should nationalize our natural resources -- and take them out of the hands of the few private families who control them.

We also need to end this phony Drug War which exists ONLY with the cooperation and corruption of government officials and law enforcement. The wealth/power and secrecy which extends from the DRUG WAR are undermining our democracy.

This is an aggressive and powerful force attacking "government of the people" in America.

Also want to mention to you that I was hoping you would run as a Democrat -- there is, I think another seat open in CA?????? -- a Republican seat???? and in that way you could still oppose Pelosi's position on IMPEACHMENT but also perhaps end up seated in Congress!!!! Which would be great !!!!

Additionally, I would encourage all Americans to begin to discuss capitalism and understand that it is not a form of economic democracy; but the reverse. Unregulated capitalism is merely organized crime.

As we see from just one of the King-of-the-Hill capitalists -- Murdoch -- Capitalism is "a ridiculous King-of-the-Hill System."

Thanks, Cindy --
Best wishes for your success

The plan I am sending you has been approved by many prominent thinkers and
activists in the field. Which includes: Benjamin Ferencz, Chief Prosecutor
at the Nuremburg Trials, Ken Livingstone-Mayor of London,
Bishop Thomas Gumbleton of Detroit, Tom Hayden, Richard Falk, Matthew Rothschild, Anthony Arnove, Danny Schecter, Tony Benn- Former Member of the British parliament ,Reggie Rivers,Frida Berrigan,
Robert Jensen, Andrew Bard Schmookler, Burhan Al-Chalabi and others.
I formulated this plan in September 2004, based on a comprehensive
study of the issues. For my plan to be successful it must be implemented
with all seven points beginning to happen within a very short period of
time.
I have run up against a wall of doubt about my plan due to it's
rational nature ,and due to it's adherence to placing the blame on the
invaders, and then trying to formulate a process of extrication which would
put all entities in this conflict face to face, to begin to finally solve
the dilemmas that exist.
If you read my plan you will see that it is guided by a reasonable
and practical compromise that could end this war and alleviate the
internecine civil violence that is confronting Iraq at this juncture in it's
history.
I am making a plea for my plan to be put into action on a wide-scale.
I need you to circulate it and use all the persuasion you have to bring it
to the attention of those in power.
Just reading my plan and sending off an e-mail to me that you received
it will not be enough.

This war must end-we who oppose it can do this by using my plan.
We must fight the power and end the killing.

If you would like to view some comments and criticism about my plan
I direct you to my blog: sevenpointman

Thank you my dear friend,

Howard Roberts

A Seven-point plan for an Exit Strategy in Iraq

1) A timetable for the complete withdrawal of American and British forces
must be announced.
I envision the following procedure, but suitable fine-tuning can be
applied by all the people involved.

A) A ceasefire should be offered by the Occupying side to
representatives of the Sunni insurgency and the Shiite and Kurdish communities. These
representatives would be guaranteed safe passage, to any meetings. The
individual insurgency groups and communities would designate who would attend.
At this meeting a written document declaring a one-month ceasefire,
witnessed by a United Nations authority, will be fashioned and eventually
signed. This document will be released in full, to all Iraqi newspapers, the
foreign press, and the Internet.

( The inclusion of Kurdish communities in this sub-section was added in early September 2006-
as an attempt to define the goals of parity and fairness and to avoid any sectarian splitting
of Iraq.)

B) US and British command will make public its withdrawal, within
sixth-months of 80 % of their troops.

C) Every month, a team of United Nations observers will verify the
effectiveness of the ceasefire.
All incidences on both sides will be reported.

D) Combined representative armed forces of both the Occupying
nations and the insurgency organizations and major community factions. that agreed to the cease fire will
protect the Iraqi people from actions by terrorist cells.

E) Combined representative armed forces from both the Occupying
nations and the insurgency organizations/community factions will begin creating a new military
and police force. Those who served, without extenuating circumstances, in
the previous Iraqi military or police, will be given the first option to
serve.

F) After the second month of the ceasefire, and thereafter, in
increments of 10-20% ,a total of 80% will be withdrawn, to enclaves in Qatar
and Bahrain. The governments of these countries will work out a temporary
land-lease housing arrangement for these troops. During the time the troops
will be in these countries they will not stand down, and can be re-activated
in the theater, if the chain of the command still in Iraq, the newly
formed Iraqi military, the leaders of the insurgency/community factions, and two international
ombudsman (one from the Arab League, one from the United Nations), as a
majority, deem it necessary.

G) One-half of those troops in enclaves will leave three-months after they
arrive, for the United States or other locations, not including Iraq.

H) The other half of the troops in enclaves will leave after
six-months.

I) The remaining 20 % of the Occupying troops will, during this six
month interval, be used as peace-keepers, and will work with all the
designated organizations, to aid in reconstruction and nation-building.

J) After four months they will be moved to enclaves in the above
mentioned countries.
They will remain, still active, for two month, until their return to
the States, Britain and the other involved nations.

2) At the beginning of this period the United States will file a letter with
the Secretary General of the Security Council of the United Nations, making
null and void all written and proscribed orders by the CPA, under R. Paul
Bremer. This will be announced and duly noted.

3) At the beginning of this period all contracts signed by foreign countries
will be considered in abeyance until a system of fair bidding, by both
Iraqi and foreign countries, will be implemented ,by an interim Productivity
and Investment Board, chosen from pertinent sectors of the Iraqi economy.
Local representatives of the 18 provinces of Iraq will put this board
together, in local elections.

4) At the beginning of this period, the United Nations will declare that
Iraq is a sovereign state again, and will be forming a Union of 18
autonomous regions. Each region will, with the help of international
experts, and local bureaucrats, do a census as a first step toward the
creation of a municipal government for all 18 provinces. After the census, a
voting roll will be completed. Any group that gets a list of 15% of the
names on this census will be able to nominate a slate of representatives.
When all the parties have chosen their slates, a period of one-month will be
allowed for campaigning.
Then in a popular election the group with the most votes will represent that
province.
When the voters choose a slate, they will also be asked to choose five
individual members of any of the slates.
The individuals who have the five highest vote counts will represent a
National government.
This whole process, in every province, will be watched by international
observers as well as the local bureaucrats.

During this process of local elections, a central governing board, made up
of United Nations, election governing experts, insurgency organizations, US
and British peacekeepers, and Arab league representatives, will assume the
temporary duties of administering Baghdad, and the central duties of
governing.

When the ninety representatives are elected they will assume the legislative
duties of Iraq for two years.

Within three months the parties that have at least 15% of the
representatives will nominate candidates for President and Prime Minister.

A national wide election for these offices will be held within three months
from their nomination.

The President and the Vice President and the Prime Minister will choose
their cabinet, after the election.

5) All debts accrued by Iraq will be rescheduled to begin payment, on the
principal after one year, and on the interest after two years. If Iraq is
able to handle another loan during this period she should be given a grace
period of two years, from the taking of the loan, to comply with any
structural adjustments.

6) The United States and the United Kingdom shall pay Iraq reparations for
its invasion in the total of 120 billion dollars over a period of twenty
years for damages to its infrastructure. This money can be defrayed as
investment, if the return does not exceed 6.5 %.

7) During the interim period all those accused of crimes against the Iraqi people,
or against international law will be given access to a fair trial.
The extent of the implications of the international nature of the crime, and the
security standards which exist in Iraq will dictate the place of the trial, and it's subsequent procedures.
All defendants will have the right to present any evidence they want, and to
choose freely their own lawyers.
If they are found guilty they will be given all necessary appeals provided for by the jurisdiction
of their trials, and will be sentenced in Iraq, after all these appeals are exhausted.
If they are found not guilty they will be released and given protection under international law,
with the strict adherence to these laws by the judicial organs of a sovereign Iraq.

Please also visit http://www.sheehanforcongress.us -- while we're waiting for the official site to launch, some of us are signing up as volunteers, likely donors and newsletter readers. Thank you.

I think the invasion of Afghanistan was justified -- we really came as liberators. The problem was that Bush was interested only in invading Iraq, so all the money and manpower was saved for that, and once the special forces, CIA and air support with the help of some war lords routed the Taliban the war was turned over to the war lords. Millions of refugees started streaming in from Pakistan -- billions should have been spent on de-mining the country, building up infrastructure and helping the refugees rebuild their homes. Instead they were left to the mercy of the war lords. Also, Bin-Laden was trapped in the caves of Bora Bora, but the war lords let him escape with the rest of Al-Qaeda leadership. The most important thing globally is the liberation of women -- initially it was promising in Afghanistan, but the American betrayal associated with the war in Iraq has set it back almost to Taliban level.
I propose a complete reversal of priorities: the hundreds of billions scheduled for the war in Iraq be devoted for a "Marshall Plan" for rebuilding Afghanistan. We are the problem in Iraq -- we should leave as quickly as possible, leaving the parties to resolve their differences without us present. The neighbors have a major interest in preventing more refugees flooding their countries, the Iraqis have an interest in stopping the bloodshed, and alliance with the invader is anathema, so get out!!! In Afghanistan, the corruption because of the power of the war lords and the dependence on the opium crop can be handled by the US buying it out and pouring money directly into local organizations for rebuilding and education. The "Northwest Frontier" is not the only external Afghan resource -- there is also the diaspora, especially in the West that could play a major role in helping the local elements of society plan their future.

PS to my post above: I meant to point out that the relative merits of the Afghanistan adventure, magnified through the lens of the manifestly malignant invasion of Iraq, made Afghanistan a Lesser-Evil option that is catnip to moderate liberals/progressives.

Politicians, and particularly Democrats, have long been hagridden by the conviction that it is an absolute necessity for national leaders to expose their War Boner, pardon the expression, to the public at large. It is some kind of powerful, atavistic anxiety transmitted from the dawn of mankind and the bowels of Hell: a settled conviction that the public demands assurance that its leaders possess a fearful War Boner and an unremitting will to swing it at need.

I trust that there is no question regarding President Unitard's capabilities in that regard-- one glance at the package stuffed into that flightsuit answers the question. Mission Accomplished!

The perceived omnipotence of the requirement that modern "civilized" politicians nevertheless proclaim their bona fides as Warlords-- as we've seen from the Bay of Pigs through Vietnam, Grenada, Panama, Iraq, Iraq, Iraq, Somalia, Iraq-- politicians are ruled by anxiety over the dire need to be strong, decisive, fearless, and fierce in defense of the nation. Any suggestion of weakness or hesitation is politically fatal. And if the exercise of ordinary wisdom, prudence, benevolent leadership and comity might spark doubt in the lowest common denominator of citizens, a spark always mightily fanned by corporate media, such risky habits must perforce be avoided.

And this anxiety trickles down to moderate supporters, inclined to proclaim support for "just", reasonable and necessary military action, not by a long shot some sort of lame pansy wooly-brained peacenik. An insidious standing wave is set up, reinforcing the top-down War Boner dynamic with moderate support for safe and responsible use of same.

And so Afghanistan, before it was dropped a few times and rolled around in the dirt, seemed an opportunity for moderate prog/libs to cast off the odious peacenik Mark of Abel and find common cause with moderates, including wingnut-lites. If one is resigned and daunted by the "common-sense" understanding that America is not a pacifistic country, and that pacifism is generally rejected as either an impossible fantasy or a suicidal abdication of responsibility to defend one's country, a popular war is almost a win-win situation. Support means admission to a tiny island or oasis of solidarity, a respite from the desert wilderness of doubt and horror inhabited by dissenters.

This anxiety trickles down to supporters, who in turn

Whoops, pardon the double-post, but it appears that I accidently submitted an unfinished comment. Sorry about that.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

PS to my post above: I meant to point out that the relative merits of the Afghanistan adventure, magnified through the lens of the manifestly malignant invasion of Iraq, made Afghanistan a Lesser-Evil option that is catnip to moderate liberals/progressives.

Politicians, and particularly Democrats, have long been hagridden by the conviction that it is an absolute necessity for national leaders to expose their War Boner, pardon the expression, to the public at large. It is some kind of powerful, atavistic anxiety transmitted from the dawn of mankind and the bowels of Hell: a settled conviction that the public demands assurance that its leaders possess a fearful War Boner and an unremitting will to swing it at need.

I trust that there is no question regarding President Unitard's capabilities in that regard-- one glance at the package stuffed into that flightsuit answers the question. Mission Accomplished!

The perceived omnipotence of the requirement that modern "civilized" politicians nevertheless proclaim their bona fides as Warlords-- as we've seen from the Bay of Pigs through Vietnam, Grenada, Panama, Iraq, Iraq, Iraq, Somalia, Iraq-- politicians are ruled by anxiety over the dire need to be strong, decisive, fearless, and fierce in defense of the nation. Any suggestion of weakness or hesitation is politically fatal. And if the exercise of ordinary wisdom, prudence, benevolent leadership and comity might spark doubt in the lowest common denominator of citizens, a spark always mightily fanned by corporate media, such risky habits must perforce be avoided.

And this anxiety trickles down to moderate supporters, inclined to proclaim support for "just", reasonable and necessary military action, not by a long shot some sort of lame pansy wooly-brained peacenik. An insidious standing wave is set up, reinforcing the top-down War Boner dynamic with moderate support for safe and responsible use of same.

And so Afghanistan, before it was dropped a few times and rolled around in the dirt, seemed an opportunity for moderate prog/libs to cast off the odious peacenik Mark of Abel and find common cause with moderates, including wingnut-lites. If one is resigned and daunted by the "common-sense" understanding that America is not a pacifistic country, and that pacifism is generally rejected as either an impossible fantasy or a suicidal abdication of responsibility to defend one's country, a popular war is almost a win-win situation. Support means admission to a tiny island or oasis of solidarity, a respite from the desert wilderness of doubt and horror inhabited by dissenters.

♥ Go Cindy! ♥

In pursuit of bin Laden, the U.S. dropped thousands of weapons of mass destruction, bombs, on innocent civilians in Afghanistan. How can they justify that? The answer is they can't.

RoundAbout said:
"As long as capitalism exists so will war."

I would add, so would communism when both systems are run by corrupt politicians.

All political systems and combinations thereof can work if they're run by the people, not by corruptible representatives. Representative systems require periodic revolutions.

Direct democracy in Switzerland has lasted 150 years giving them no wars, the highest per capita income in the world, no boom and bust economy, no war on drugs, no immigration and crime problems, the best education and healthcare and a healthy environment.

http://ni4d.us/library/fossedal_direct_democracy_in_switzerland.htm

http://www.gravel2008.us/national_initiative

Ofmelabes writes:
"I think the invasion of Afghanistan was justified..."

Er... would you feel the same if they had just invaded *your* country?

Would you be so upbeat and sanguine if they had just bombed *your* family's wedding party to bits and wiped out your children, along with your wife, and most of your kin folk?

Would you feel those invaders of your land were *justified* in killing, maiming and traumatising your countrymen, demolishing your homes and your whole infrastructure on a vast scale, -leaving you with little more than the clothes you stood up in?

...And if those invaders were also selling / giving massive amounts of weaponry to the local hoodlums, so that those violent hoods could threaten you and whatever was left if your family?

This is the kind of thing that is happening to the people of Afghanistan, -everyday single day.

Do you still feel your country was *justified* in this horrific invasion?

~If so, I feel your idea of 'justice' differs slightly from my own!

As the old saying goes: "What's sauce for the goose, is sauce for the gander."

"I couldn't be sure though because it has become certain groups and individuals' life's missions to harass me."

I really wish she would get over herself!

I agree with UN-common-dreams. The invasion of Afghanistan was not justified, and nor do the invaders there deserve "honor." It is, further, another endless, destabilizing occupation. I stand by Barbara Lee, the only person in congress who voted against giving war bush the authorization to attack Afghanistan. Down with militarization and ALL "troops"!

I am always very moved when I read Cindy's writing. I can feel the lump in my throat whenever she reflects on the loss of her beloved son Casey.

The following statement in Cindy's article caught my eye and I have been reading and rereading it:

"My own son was a soldier and, although he didn't have any kind of killer instinct and a fear of having to kill someone when he went to Iraq, he was a good soldier and he loved his Army family and proved that love by dying to save some of them. I think most of our troops are in Iraq and Afghanistan to support their "buddies"..."

I believe Cindy when she says that Casey didn't have any kind of killer instinct and had a fear of having to kill someone in Iraq. But isn't the bottom line in the military that you must be prepared to kill? Soldiers are expected to be ready to use the training they receive in boot camp. When this training is complete, the assumption is that soldiers are ready, and willing, to take human life if deployed into a war zone. We all are aware, aren't we, that the majority of those killed in modern warfare are overwhelmingly civilians. Do young enlistees not know this?

How do we as parents guide the upcoming generations to make choices that allow them to serve their fellow citizens, to be there to support their buddies, to be willing to make sacrifices for the good of all? And how do we do that without romanticizing the military? How can we affirm the heartfelt desires to serve that clearly motivate some young people who enlist in the military -- while at that same time discouraging them from making the choice to join an institution -- the military -- that relies on violence, or threat of violence, to achieve "success."

Acknowledging the horrors that are committed by our soldiers, in our name, every day in Iraq and Afghanistan is not easy. It is certainly easier for me to focus on how unconscionable, how evil, the actions of the Bush administration are. But I feel strongly that I must honest with my sons that without the participation of the soldiers, and without the acquiescence of U.S. taxpayers who foot the bill, President Bush could not wage this war.

My mother cried when I joined up in 1966. I told her I had no choice, that I was trying to take the safest course I could. I like to think that if I'd got killed, she'd have remembered me through protest. When I got back, we protested as a family. We were lucky.

If one of my kids died in this one, I'd probably say screw everybody and hide in my house. Cindy and the Gold Star Families for Peace did better than that, they deserve credit from all of us for fortitude and determination. And for love of country, above all.

It takes five years before we stop looking for them. We had a very wonderful surreal experience, and after that day, we never asked to have them come back. They are fine, and do not want to come back. That we know with absolute certanty. I seldon tell that, and wish I could have done so in private, but I had the feeling it was okay to say it here.

BTW I ran for a city council seat once. It is both fun and very nasty at the same time. Be damn careful and get a really good campaign manager___ and still be yourself. Nite, Take care and have fun too. Kem

thanks kem patrick...after 3 years and 5 months...I have learned what my well-meaning friends said is not true: time heals everything.
i liken it to having a horrible toothache that won't go away...you learn how to live somehow with the pain.
i know that is a weak comparison...but it's the best one i got.

also, people have said: at least you have 3 more kids...and although, i do feel so blessed...so much more that many people (iraqis and afghanis come to mind)...it's like telling someone who loses their dominant arm: at least you have 3 other limbs.

bless you...i am sorry you so intimately know my pain
cindy

Okay cindy--logistics have delayed your formal announcement to run against the Pelos. That being said, why haven't you gotten your butt back to SF and started recruiting staff, planning strategy, and building some sort of a team to assist you in what will be a Herculean task?--

It is beginning to look like you are not really serious about your anticipated candidacy.

LITTLE BROTHER says, "The perceived omnipotence of the requirement that modern "civilized" politicians nevertheless proclaim their bona fides as Warlords– as we've seen from the Bay of Pigs through Vietnam..." Thank you so much for making this point vividly and eloquently! I have been stating in this forum that what is generally worshipped as "god" is a mythological new hybrid of MARS, god of war. The fact that leadership is presented in the image and likeness of the god of war, while our current "president" pretends to have conversations with "the big guy" explains why people countenance unspeakable brutality under the guise of religion, or the blasphemous delusion that such activity represents "god's" will. When 50 million Americans, undoubtedly the 30% that still believe in our excuse-for-a-president also happen to be Christian fundamentalists, then the very notion of what their religion takes as true figures into the political calculus since it is their twisted belief system that is driving the world towards Armageddon. To program people through authoritarian religion to think that war is god's will is the ugliest of spiritual sins and QUITE effective as we see today. It is time for the blinders to come off. Apart from a direct threat to personal security what makes people go to war? They are told that it's their patriotic duty, yes; but it's much more powerful when the religious component is used and note that this is the same tactic deployed by the Arab Jihadists when they get young men with raging testosterone to become suicide bombers by promising the sexual relief of a future heaven with virgins to attend to them. Wonder why abstinence is so popular? Sexually repressed feelings make for far greater aggression and war requires that of young men (and the occasional female that identifies with this erroneous, deranged model thinking it means "you've come a long way, baby!")

By failing to IMPEACH, Pelosi's become collaboratively complicit in perpetuating the internationally criminal Bush wars; Cindy's campaign, as well as the switch to Kucinich can't come soon enough.

dear pjd
see you in november...i am honored to receive the award!
cindy

Hey to everyone,

I wish I had taught Casey better. He joined the military to get college money and was told that even if there was a war (he joined in May, 2000) he wouldn't "see combat." Casey believed his recruiter...I didn't. But we didn't know Casey had options. My life mission is to inform other people about the horrible military industrial complex that consumes our children. I didn't know, now I am paying for it...and Casey really paid for it! Never have children, never grow old with a soul-mate...and I will miss those things with my cherished oldest son, too.

As for my campaign...it is deadly serious. I am putting a team together...I only thought of it on July 3rd...I was really hoping that the Dems would do the right thing and start to impeach the war criminals in Congress.

If anyone wants to help on my campaign...please send an email to: campcaseymom@yahoo.com
The site: cindyforcongress.org will go live soon to accept donations. it is not a process that happens overnight. My staff of two are working hard to make everything happen by the 9th when I formally announce.

And if anyone doubts that people harrass me, go to the Gathering of Eagles website...they harrass me everywhere I go...so I do have to be careful. Sorry if that offends anyone here.

And finally, Scott who?

I love this site...not very many places we get to see the "r" word.

Lovve
Cindy

Poet, you are such a pleasant person. You often ask a quetion in such a friendly manner, you probably love yourself. If not, why don't you go do it.

Great,

It is good to see that, now you are running for Congress, you do take your job very seriously and try to gain a wider perspective than only the war in Iraq.
I have another suggestion: have you tried to get in touch with those ladies who were called 'the Jersey girls', four women who lost their husbands during the 9-11 disaster and by their own questioning and investigations, came face-to-face with the horrible Bush regime ? They provide yet another angle in what exactly was so wrong about the last few years. They also have an entire organization behind them, just like your 'Gold Star families'. Now that you are a politician (or do you regard that still as an insult ?), it is time to build alliances: Against the Iraq war, against the Afghan war, for a serious investigation into the 9-11 attacks, for peace, against the Military-industrial complex, against election fraud, against the use of the media as propaganda tools etc. etc.

i have joined the jersey girls in calling for a valid 911 investigation...
you will also find that i have written extensively on the military industrial complex...look at a few days back on cd when I wrote: Brought to you by Boeing...which was also about the media's financial stake in war.

thanks...and Kem...all I can say is, my deepest heartfelt love for you and your angels...
cindy

ps:
i hope i never consider myself a "politician"....perish the thought

Dear Cindy,
I think one of the main reasons you 'touch, move, and inspire' people, is precisely that you *don't* speak and write *like a politician*!

I've read a lot of what you have said since you first started campaigning, and noticed that you have several (very successful) components to your communications:

1: You are *REAL*. Your every word is not carefully weighed, honed and 'spun' by calculating toadies in a campaign management team. India's most famed poet, Rabindranath Tagore, once said, "You can't write poetry by committee."

2. You speak from the *HEART* -and not just 'designer sentiment' blent with inane platitudes, (a la Burning Bu$h) ~ and this quality communicates to human beings, everywhere.

3. You are obviously intelligent, and your turn of phrase is a mix of homespun wisdom and maturity of vision, and yes, - is also informed by the terrible heartache you have endured. (We who have undergone such severe pain often gain 'interior medals' for it, -so not all is lost!)
Tears wash clean the soul...

4. In conjunction with the above, you have COURAGE, –and this attribute, along with LOVE, is a quality which springs from the heart, and these eternal virtues cannot be feigned. We who witness 'a lone woman standing up to be counted' is an image still somewhat iconoclastic, and your action *inspires* and motivates others!
~Humanity loves it's (authentic) heroes and heroines...

Cindy, heaven forefend that you should ever 'become a politician' ! ;)
Except for a few, like Mr Kucinich, most of that breed have few authentic morals, and those that they do start out with, soon seem to evaporate as they progress with their 'political careers'. It's a bit like trying to swim through a sewer without becoming covered in muck... Not easy, given the prevailing circumstances!

I think your armour and shield against becoming 'one of them' is to forever hold on to the energy of your *HEART* in the coming days. Heart and truth, -alongside valour, are the best antidotes to contamination when performing in that malodorous political circus!

And please keep on 'being real' in your communications!
People like Hilary Clinton come across as almost mechanical, and hard, -as if to admit to being a compassionate human was a crime, -- and that is the beginning of their downfall, because then they are no longer responding as an ordinary, CARING human being does.
Unlike them, you (eg) admit to being hurt by the 'slings and arrows' that have been hurled at you by the cave-dwellers, and that admission in itself reminds us all that you are still a thinking, feeling ALIVE being, -not a heart-dead piece of wood! :)

________________________

Lastly, on a transpersonal note, your son will have been met by what some call 'angels' (and / or his 'guides') when he left his body. He is not alone where he now resides, he has found the *freedom* of not having a body anymore.

This is an area of work and research I have been involved with for over 25 years, (and I myself have experienced 'not having a body' for a while, so speak from a little practical knowledge).

Maybe find some comfort, in knowing that Casey is now in the best possible hands, -alive and well and free from the constraints of earthly life and an earthly body, and with a broadened consciousness as well. It is an amazing experience, full of unimaginable joy!
[I think a lovely movie depiction of this 'transition' to the post mortem state, is in Robin William's movie entitled, "What Dreams May Come."]

And know too, that in contradistinction to those 'politicos' who have sold their soul to the highest bidder, as long as you fight your cause with *HEART* at the helm, then you fight the fight of Angels, --and (indubitably) -will always have them at your side as you seek to bring the Light of PEACE to this world, in place of that which the dark-hearted ones seek to bring...

God bless you in all you seek to achieve Cindy sister!

xxx

U-C-D

xoxo to you ucd
cindy

Hi Cindy,

There is something that has been nudging me, so now I am going to take the risk and spill it.

God knows you have been doing everything within your being to stop this war. I know you are risking your life for this cause.

I keep on visioning Iraqi children. I hear them ask for help just as people did during the Katrina disaster. Unfortunately, we don't have CNN showing pictures of these displaced family's on television.
I mean how long does people expect them to survive the way these people are living.

I know how these children feel. They are wondering if people in the United States and around the world really truly care about them. If they care enough to truly help them right now in their time of need.

In my mind anyways, I don't feel there is enough being done to show by deed we do care. I don't hear enough about humantarian efforts to reach these people in need and it has me concerned.

Respectively,
MA_Matriarch

Cindy, since it seems that you do check the comments here, here's my comment from the Scott Ritter piece I referenced earlier. FWIW, I can't help but stick up for you whenever I come across comments from people like Ritter, and that ditsy Joan Walsh from Salon, who claim to be anti-President Unitard and anti-war (or at least anti-Iraq War)-- but feel the need to point out that There Goes That Wrong-headed Sheehan Again! They can all kiss my... well, you get my drift.

-- Regards again, LB
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
#
Little Brother August 1st, 2007 5:14 pm

I wrote most of this elsewhere when Cindy Sheehan stepped back in May. Glad I saved a copy. (Haven't read the comments yet, FWIW.)
——————————————————————————-

Cindy Sheehan had celebrity thrust upon her, and she has more character and virtue in her fingernail parings than all of the warmongers and hapless-warmonger-enablers compacted together.

To the extent that she was not, and did not aspire to become, an "inside politics" or "inside media" or "inside social activism" public figure, she was screwed from the get-go. I have no doubt that she's been sniped at and scorned and hassled as much by ostensibly anti-war or anti-Bush citizens as by wingnut Yahoos.

I recall even Scott Ritter, whom I respect, casually ripping Sheehan in a scathing survey of the chaotic, fragmented "anti-war movement". Military man that he is, the ultimate "inside" career man, he scorned Cindy for walking point by meandering around without an agenda or goals. This reversion to pure jarhead battlefield exasperation, a testosterone-saturated growl of displeasure at some ditsy dame getting in the way, was more of a comment on his narrow focus than a telling criticism of Sheehan.

It's always been obvious to me, Ritter's harsh attitude notwithstanding, that Cindy's public career was indeed improvisational and haphazard and unscripted, i.e. human. We're not allowed to have amateurs in our culture any more; everybody must keep up by being professional or aspiring to be professional– or at least acknowledging that important matters of any kind are best trusted to professionals, so that the only sane course of action is to submit to professional authority and discipline instead of flying by the seat of one's pants, using one's own brains and heart and spirit and conscience as instruments.

Well, I think it's safe to surmise that Cindy didn't cipher and calculate her plans and intentions as finely as the Scott Ritters et al of the world would wish, and frankly had more pressing concerns that to give a damn about how they judged her.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cindy, would you run as a Green?

We the People, get it. It is the Rich and Privledged that send us off to war, always has been that way and always will be that way as long as there are Rich and Privledged people amongst us that we allow to set themselves above us. When we get THAT....well, the rich and privledged will get their due. I hope I live long enough to be part of that process.

Veteran, '66-'68

Hi Cindy. I agree with most of what you say, but I respectfully beg to differ on one important point. You say you do not believe there is such a thing as a good war. I believe that a war fought in self-defence against foreign invaders is in fact a good war. For us North Americans it is easy to loose sight of the fact that a war can be fought against a foreign invader, because we have not fought such a war since 1814.

One more thing: please stop calling Afghan people "Afghanis". "Afghani" is the name of the Afghan currency. That kind of mistake will not inspire confidence when you are on the campaign trail.

Having said that, I wish you the best of luck in your campaign, and I would support you if I were a US citizen.

In solidarity and peace,

Mark Marshall
Toronto

Ofmelabes;

I was taken by your post, and to offer support, I thought I would try to find out more information about "War Lords". Well, much to my surprise and chagrin, the dictionary defines "War Lord" as U.S. Gov.

oh well.

Tax-and-spend liberals are bad? Don't-tax-yet-spend-for-war conservatives are good? Let the people in this country pony up and $upport our troops by paying the price of these wars and you'll see your children come home. Does an all-volunteer army mean that we at home don't pay with either our lives or our dollars? There is little serious opposition to the commander and thief because the average American has little skin in the game, that is, except for the minority actually in Iraq or Afghanistan. Face it, our troops are a minority and we've seen that it takes a lot for this nation to face up to the difficulties of minorities. Tugging at the pocketbook is, sadly, the surest and quickest way to wake people up.