Sort of like the temporary paralysis I suffered when the non-story of Plamegate was in full-brew, I find myself endlessly fascinated with the shiny object that is Cindy Sheehan. In particular, I'd like to take a whack today at her denial that she ever said, "My son joined the Army to protect America, not Israel. You get America out of Iraq and Israel out of Palestine and you'll stop the terrorism." The full transcript from Anderson Cooper reads thusly:
COOPER: You were also quoted as saying, "My son joined the Army to protect America, not Israel. You get America out of Iraq and Israel out of Palestine and you'll stop the terrorism." How responsible do you believe Israel is for the amount of terrorism in the world?
SHEEHAN: I didn't say that.
COOPER: You didn't say that? OK.
SHEEHAN: I didn't -- I didn't say -- I didn't say that my son died for Israel. I've never said that. I saw somebody wrote that and it wasn't my words. Those aren't even words that I would say.
I do believe that the Palestinian issue is a hot issue that needs to be solved and it needs to be more fair and equitable but I never said my son died for Israel.
COOPER: OK, I'm glad I asked you that because, you know, as you know, there's tons of stuff floating around on the Internet on sites of all political persuasions.
SHEEHAN: I know and that's not -- yes.
COOPER: So, I'm glad we had the opportunity to clear that.
SHEEHAN: Yes, and thank you because those are not my words. Those aren't -- that doesn't even sound like me saying that.
COOPER: OK. I'm very glad we got that...
SHEEHAN: And I have read it. I have read it. I'm glad you did too.
You'll pardon us saying so, Ms. Sheehan, but that sounds like exactly the sort of lunatic thing that you might expect to find Cindy Sheehan saying. So the "it doesn't even sound like me" defense isn't really probably your strongest. But what about the rest of Sheehan's statement?
Well, technically, Sheehan did not "say" that her son died for Israel. She wrote it. And also, technically, she is not accused of saying that her son died for Israel. She is accused of indignantly claiming that her son did not sign up for the military to defend Israel. So, Robert Jordan readers, is it possible we are dealing with an Aes Sedai? Perhaps she isn't lying, but the truth we're hearing might not be the truth we think it is.
As is widely known by now, the article was posted to a group called bullyard from Cindy Sheehan's AOL account. Someone from bullyard apparently forwarded the letter on to Nightline, with Cindy Sheehan's name on it. Rich Lowry originally claimed that the letter was signed, but has since backtracked, saying only that her name was on the letter in question.
So, in order to believe this story, one would have to believe that someone hacked into Cindy Sheehan's AOL account - in March 2005, before she was a widely known personage outside of the extreme left (who all love her anyway), and sent this to bullyard. Further, according to the person at Bullyard, they sent a copy of the letter to Sheehan, explaining that it would be sent to Nightline, and never got a response from Sheehan. Hmm. That seems like the kind of thing I might want to disassociate myself from, if I didn't say it, and someone was telling me they were about to send it to a major news organization.
In point of fact, that email, which I still strongly suspect is authentic, is not the only place Sheehan has made inflammatory anti-Israel remarks. She duplicated the "Israel out of Palestine" remarks at a Veterans for Peace rally, as covered by fellow anti-war sympathizer Mike Ferner:
He died to make your friends richer. He died to expand American imperialism in the Middle East. We're not freer here, thanks to your PATRIOT Act. Iraq is not free. You get America out of Iraq and Israel out of Palestine and you'll stop the terrorism.
Call me crazy, but that sounds pretty much exactly like the letter in question - minus the phrase "agenda to benefit Israel", it's the exact same sentiment - including the part where Israel is at fault.
It's very strange to me, personally, given the other bizarre conspiracy theories she has embraced, and continues to embrace, that she would bother even attempting to distance herself from this one. I mean, if you're going to say that America is evil, unjust, and not worth dying for, why would you care about stepping on the toes of the Israelis?
If any prominent news personage develops the testosterone-producing organs to ask such a question, or any other question about her ridiculously extremist rhetoric, we'll be here to report.
UPDATE: Welcome, Michelle Malkin readers!
"I find myself endlessly fascinated with the shiny object that is Cindy Sheehan."
Tell me about it. I'm hooked. She encompasses so many facets of the WoT.
Posted by: Angry in T.O. | August 16, 2005 at 01:27 PM
More "patriotism" from the left.
They are a disgusting, racist, anti-Semitic swamp of evil.
Posted by: eddiebear | August 16, 2005 at 01:37 PM
Soon, Cindy and her ilk, will go away.
Posted by: THIRDWAVEDAVE | August 16, 2005 at 02:34 PM
Sure Cindy is being used by the leftist anti-American crazies BUT I think she is being used willingly.
Posted by: docdave | August 16, 2005 at 04:12 PM
Hehe, I woke up this morning determined to make it Cindy-free and I've already got three posts up on her and little on anything else.
Posted by: Brainster | August 16, 2005 at 09:09 PM
well, i don't know if the letter is authentic, but i have the link to it
Here:
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/bullyard/browse_frm/thread/b314619173c7f8ab/4957f2ddbafd159b?hl=en
if anyone is interested.
looks authentic to me.
Posted by: refried beans | August 17, 2005 at 11:32 AM
Word, Dude.
Posted by: Robert Schwartz | August 17, 2005 at 07:42 PM
They are a disgusting, racist, anti-Semitic swamp of evil.
How can anyone who makes a comment like that one contribute to a useful dialogue? Cindy believes the way she does and having lost her son, she definitely has the right. This holds true for the far right parents who lose beloved children as well.
Cindy isn't being used. She is doing what she believes is right. Since she's not physically hurting anybody, how can that be wrong?
Posted by: theprisoner6 | August 18, 2005 at 12:35 PM
The desire to support a Palestinian homeland doesn't mean that one is against the existence of Israel. I don't think Ms. Sheehan was trying to justify the use of militancy and force against Israel. She was pointing out that the military occupation no longer effectively counters damage to Israel by rockets and insurgents. The creation of a Palestinian homelend is a just, fair and necessary step in the peace process. Israel has a much better chance of living at peace with its neighbors if the peace process is begun again. Of course, it has to be fair to both sides and logically the right of return for refugees will have to be dropped, but she is not arguing against Israel's right to exist and their right to self-defense. Not every peace activist and pro-Palestinian supporter agrees with every aspect of their political mentality, calls for the destruction of Israel and denies a country the right to exist and defend itself. Perhaps there should be more openmindedness on this site. Palestine is like Azerbaijan, Tibet and Yugoslavia. It's a human rights issue. It's a right of a people to self-determination. If that can be recognized for Israel, why not Palestine?
Posted by: Stephanie K | November 23, 2007 at 10:25 PM