Talk:Cindy Sheehan

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Please Move Category to Conspiracy Theorists CAPITAL T

Dear Admins, Please correct Category:Conspiracy theorists to Category:Conspiracy Theorists. I converted from lowercase to the proper Conservapedia standard of upper case for each word of a category name and moved all the entries but this locked one.

Thank you. TheAmericanRedoubt 14:31, 4 December 2014 (EST)


can you at least leave the part about exploitng her sons death for Political gain? (no doubt she has)Bohdan

That's right she carried this boy to term, birthed him, raised him up all the while looking for some way to "cash in" on his eventual demise. Have you no shame, sir? Rob Pommertalk
perhaps a better question would be if she has any shame. she has been heavily criticised for many things. You dont hear about this from the liberal media. Perhaps you should do some research. (I plan to add these later)Bohdan

by the way, did not you hear that her own relatives released a statement saying that she was exloiting her sons death. when she said that her immediate family supported her, her husband divorced her. I am not putting these facts in the article yet because i am looking for a good source. apparently, i have some shame. please dont insult me.Bohdan

Get a cite (or cites) and we'll examine the veracity of the claim. RobS 23:56, 19 April 2007 (EDT)


Is it proper to include David Duke's support? The KKK supported Bush for president, but that doesn't mean he supports them. Czolgolz 00:20, 13 May 2007 (EDT)

remove it if you really want. But i think she actually would support him, at least regarding Israel. go ahead and take it out.Bohdan
Actully most KKK members hate Bush.Jaques 07:20, 23 May 2007 (EDT)

I didn't pay much attention to her when I heard she was standing outside the White House gates. I figured she was some sort of attention-seeker then, because anyone else would have gone through the usual channels instead of attracting a media circus.

But it's possible she decided to cash in on her son's untimely demise for political gain. And I wouldn't put it past the Democrats to put her up to it. Exploitation of emotion is something the media is very good at, and the media is saturated with Democrats. (Oh, and did I mention the L-word yet?)

I figured the whole point of Democrats using Sheehan was that she could take some sort of "moral high ground" by virtue of being a bereaved mother. The only thing that smells fake about it is that I heard she was more interested in protesting the US military campaign in Iraq, than about expressing her feelings about her son. In other words, she didn't just want to share her grief, she wanted to blame the president and his policies for (something like) "needless deaths" - blame anyone but the enemies of Iraq, I guess.

Anyway, if one our writers would like to research Sheehan's arguments and positions, I suppose our readers might be interested. But we should also air a few conservative rebuttals for balance. --Ed Poor 15:11, 29 May 2007 (EDT)


Many have declared and celebrated her as the face of the anti-war, anti-American movement.

What does "anti-war" or "anti-American" mean? The media likes to use short words, but an encyclopedia should be clear, even if it takes an extra sentence or two. We're not bound by the 9-second soundbite rule.

Is she against the terrorists, against the new Iraqi army, against the US, or what? Maybe she just doesn't want the US to defend Iraq against the terrorists, but otherwise loves America. Let's be clear about her position, if we're going to mention it at all. --Ed Poor 15:04, 29 May 2007 (EDT)


She has also made extremely antisemitic remarks

Nothing in the cited sources show anything anti-semetic. It is possible to not agree with the policies of the state of Israel, or even be against its existence, without being anti-semetic. Boomcoach 15:52, 29 May 2007 (EDT)

Perhaps we should say that her remarks were hostile towards Israel or "anti-Israeli". --Ed Poor 15:55, 29 May 2007 (EDT)
I think that would be more accurate. Boomcoach 15:56, 29 May 2007 (EDT)
She didnt disagree with Israel, Cindy sheehan blamed Israel for the war in Iraq, and her sons death. Claims like this are classic anti-Semitism.Богдан Talk 16:00, 29 May 2007 (EDT)

She didn't blame Israel; she blamed neo-con support for Israel. There is a difference. AlanE 16:26, 29 May 2007 (EDT)

"My son joined the army to protect America, not Israel" pretty clear to me.Богдан Talk 16:28, 29 May 2007 (EDT)
No it isn't clear at all. The fact is that a large part of the reason Islamist terrorists want to attack us is because of US supprot for Israel. This is not a controversial claim, but a well documented fact. Pointing out this fact is in no way anti-Israel or anti-semitic and is not blaming Israel or the US for terrorist attacks. Accepting the realityof what motivates our enemy is not the same thing as validating that motivation.--Zerba 13:55, 1 June 2007 (EDT)
She said,
  • Casey was killed for lies and for a PNAC Neo-Con agenda to benefit Israel.
In her so-called "resignation letter" (I doubt we've seen or heard the last from her) she reiterated,
  • The most devastating conclusion that I reached ... was that Casey did indeed die for nothing.
Seems pretty clear, even after removing herself as the "face" of the movement, her allegations of a Neo-Con Jewish conspiracy have not changed. RobS 15:03, 1 June 2007 (EDT)
She says nothing about a "Neo-Con Jewish Conspiracy". Do you deny that the US supports Israel? Do you deny that Neo-Cons, and Republicans in general are a major part of that support? Disagreeing with the US's support of Israel may be wrong, it may be shortsighted, or it may even be right, but it is not, by itself, anti-semetic.
It seems that she feels that the US is spending US lives on the defense of the state of Israel. I don't agree with this sentiment, but there is nothing anti-semetic about it. One can quite easily dislike many things about the state of Israel, and disagree with the support that the US gives it, without having any animosity against Jews. Boomcoach 11:04, 30 May 2007 (EDT)
So the question is when is an anti-Semite not an anti-Semite; is this like the question of when is a communist not a communist? RobS 16:20, 2 June 2007 (EDT)
No, it is simply commenting that anti-Israel does not equate to anti-Semetic, any more than being anti-Iran is anti-Muslim. I realize that it is much handier, when denigrating someone, to label them as some sort of racist, but I thought that conservapedia claims that this is a vile, evil liberal tactic! Boomcoach 21:40, 3 June 2007 (EDT)
Sorry, but we got cites to support everthing claimed in the article. RobS 21:57, 3 June 2007 (EDT)

I defy you to find a single citation where Sheehan says "I hate Jewish people," as opposed to saying something negative about the political entity that is the state of Israel. The two are by no means synonymous. Sevenstring 21:59, 3 June 2007 (EDT)

Find me a single citation where Trent Lott said "I hate black people". RobS 22:12, 3 June 2007 (EDT)

I don't care a whit about Trent Lott. Don't change the subject. Step up. Make your case. Has Sheehan ever clearly said she hates Jews, as opposed to the politics of the Israeli State? Sevenstring 22:14, 3 June 2007 (EDT)

Case is made. Case closed. RobS 22:17, 3 June 2007 (EDT)

Where? Are you even READING these posts? She is on the record as criticizing the Israeli state and its policies.Fair enough. That is NOT the same as criticizing - much less expressing hatred for - the Jewish people. Where is the case made. Explain it to me like you would to an eight-year-old, 'cause I don't see it anywhere on this page or any other. Sevenstring 22:19, 3 June 2007 (EDT)

No, I'm not. And it's too late to rehabilitate her. Her so-called "farwell" did not rescind any of the anti-Semitic venom she's spewed for all these years; and reading her garbage, I do not beleive for an instant she wrote it. It was ghost written for her. The DNC is just going to have to live the historical fact and reality of a woman named Cindy Sheehan who took up their cause. RobS 22:22, 3 June 2007 (EDT) haven't even come close to answering any of my questions. Sevenstring 22:24, 3 June 2007 (EDT)

Good. Because I do not intend to do so. RobS 22:40, 3 June 2007 (EDT)

Good to see you put your intellectual honesty on the line like that. Sevenstring 22:42, 3 June 2007 (EDT)

Criticism of Israel is anti-semiticism hiding behind a different mask. See [1], [2], [3] File:User Fox.png Fox (talk|contribs) 11:35, 4 June 2007 (EDT)
Those two cites (the 3rd did not resolve as a page) are both opinion pieces, not anything that defines terms in anything but the author's mind. To criticize a political entity for their actions is not the same as attacking the primary religious/racial group that makes up that nation. Can criticizing Israil be part of an anti-semetic attack? Of course, but that does not equate to all attacks on Israel being motivated by anti-semitism. I was appalled by the Israeli secret police killing an innocent Norwegian, in an attempt at exacting retribution for Munich. That doesn't make me anti-jewish and more than my disgust at the actions of islamic terrorists makes me anti-muslim. To claim otherwise is simply to attempt to deflect any sort of criticism of Israel, the same way that people used racism as an excuse for defending OJ. Boomcoach 11:45, 4 June 2007 (EDT)
so, Fox - by that logic the state of Israel may never be criticized NO MATTER WHAT it does? Ever? Sevenstring 12:15, 4 June 2007 (EDT)
When that criticism is based upon holding Israel "to a standard of behaviour demanded of no other country while at the same time singling them out for a campaign of villification based on demonstrable falsehoods" then it is anti-semitic. And comes from "exactly the same kind of useful idiots who once supported Stalin, and waved aside all those who spoke up against the killings and the terror" File:User Fox.png Fox (talk|contribs) 15:00, 4 June 2007 (EDT)

Back To Cindy

I assume the photo of her with Chavez is supposed to say she's anti-american? Whether or not you agree with the woman everyone must admit that she got into the game as a result of her son's death. So if there is to be a picture of her with someone that is part of her public story then maybe it should be her son. Or would that be too politically biased? Priestspez 02:22, 18 June 2007 (EDT)

The photo does not say anything other than that she traveled to Venezuala to meet with Chavez (apparently at his invitation) and make public radio broadcasts with Chavez critical of US foreign policy. RobS 12:38, 18 June 2007 (EDT)


This article appears to be locked so I can't edit it, but can I suggest removal of the word "recently" in the last sentence of the 1st paragraph? Bush has not been President for quite a while, so I don't think she recently called for his impeachment. A small point, but I think it would make the article look better. Thanks. AngusT 10:40, 18 August 2010 (EDT)