Er...dissecting their purposes I mean...I promise.
This time, Drudge was right.
Washington (CNSNews.com) - The Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington, D.C., the current home of hundreds of wounded veterans from the war in Iraq, has been the target of weekly anti-war demonstrations since March. The protesters hold signs that read "Maimed for Lies" and "Enlist here and die for Halliburton." [SNIP]And I am offended that such people would rather step on wounded soldiers and their families to get to George Bush; soldiers that volunteered for military service, knowing what fate might await them. But, as I reel in my impulse to anger and adopt a clinical viewpoint, I’m forced to conclude that Code Pink’s actions are just about the most self-defeating ones they could take toward their own admitted goal, stopping the war.Among the props used by the protesters are mock caskets, lined up on the sidewalk to represent the death toll in Iraq.
Code Pink Women for Peace, one of the groups backing anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan's vigil outside President Bush's ranch in Crawford Texas, organizes the protests at Walter Reed as well.
Most of the demonstrations have been held on Friday evenings, a popular time for the family members of wounded soldiers to visit the hospital.
But the anti-war activists were unapologetic when asked whether they considered such signs as "Maimed for Lies" offensive to wounded war veterans and their families.
"I am more offended by the fact that many were maimed for life. I am more offended by the fact that they (wounded veterans) have been kept out of the news," said Kevin McCarron, a member of the anti-war group Veterans for Peace.
Kevin Pannell, who was recently treated at Walter Reed and had both legs amputated after an ambush grenade attack near Baghdad in 2004, considers the presence of the anti-war protesters in front of the hospital "distasteful."Right now, I’m in the midst of reading Thomas Sowell’s Applied Economics. The book's subtitle is Thinking Beyond Stage One and the subject spans far beyond economics. Contrary to its very unsexy title, the book is very interesting; it sharpens the nebulous idea that I’ve had for some time that most people act and react with immediate gratification in mind, giving no real thought to tomorrow, your humble (hah!) servant included.When he was a patient at the hospital, Pannell said he initially tried to ignore the anti-war activists camped out in front of Walter Reed, until witnessing something that enraged him.
"We went by there one day and I drove by and [the anti-war protesters] had a bunch of flag-draped coffins laid out on the sidewalk. That, I thought, was probably the most distasteful thing I had ever seen. Ever," Pannell, a member of the Army's First Cavalry Division, told Cybercast News Service.
"You know that 95 percent of the guys in the hospital bed lost guys whenever they got hurt and survivors' guilt is the worst thing you can deal with," Pannell said, adding that other veterans recovering from wounds at Walter Reed share his resentment for the anti-war protesters.
We have all observed as various opponents of OIF/OEF and various opponents of anything put forth by George W. Bush use any means necessary to get the war(s) to stop right now. Those methods have included:
• Attempts to drive a wedge between GWB and his natural constituency—the military: Rathergate being the prime example
• Various deployments of the Little Lies: Rove, Plame, etc.
• Attempts to demoralize the military (I think of some of these as attempts to feminize the military, but that’s another essay)
This latest on-going stunt—perpetrated by a group of radical feminists, appropriately enough--certainly falls into the latter category, but to what end? Mr. Sowell’s subtitle is further illuminated by his partially rhetorical question: “and then what?” What is the forecasted result of any proposed action? What’s supposed to happen after “Stage One?” And how is “Stage One” supposed to affect “Stage Two” and all the other stages after that?
Let’s say that the Code Pink types got together and said, “let’s go harass protest hold a vigil for the arrival of the crippled baby-killers wounded soldiers.” However, beyond the obvious heartlessness demonstrated by both the proposal and the ability to put it into action, did any of these women think logically about what such protests were supposed to accomplish?
Most of the soldiers who are at Walter Reed are those who, like Mr. Parnell, have very serious injuries: amputations, full-thickness burns, head and facial trauma, etc. The point is that most of these gentlemen and ladies are not going back to Iraq or Afghanistan in any military capacity ever again. And I would venture to say, that most of the loved ones of these GIs are happy to have them back under whatever conditions; the relatives simply want to tell their injured soldier/marine/sailor/airman how much they love them and are eager to help them rehabilitate to whatever level possible.
But Code Pink still “protests” these people. What could possibly be the organization’s goal? Stopping the war? Getting disinterested civilian observers to see things their way? Make George W. Bush look bad?
If those are some of the goals, then tell me: how is holding up a sign that says “Maimed for Lies” in front of physically ailing GIs and their emotionally raw civilian family members going to accomplish such goals?
The mainstream media understand only too well that the results of Code Pink’s mission would blow back hard on the anti-war position were that mission to be subject to the same type of scrutiny that certain other Code Pink protests have received. That’s why outlets such as CNN would rather repeatedly broadcast the blather of a washed-up old right-wing extremist than put a camera and a microphone in front of the Code Pinkists as they sit in deployment in front of a military hospital on Friday nights.
Through this move, Code Pink has acted against George W. Bush via those who carry out his orders. Somehow, they believed--without thinking of human nature and without having even the barest understanding of the mindset of those who implement the military objectives of this nation--that their actions would hurt the war effort. This is what passes for planning at Code Pink. They have, however, only served to hinder their own agenda by making themselves look like ghouls and like the types who would only be brave enough to take on soldiers when the latter are injured. I doubt that this was supposed to be part of "Stage Two."
And, strangely enough, I’m in the mood to take a trip to DC.
(Thanks to reader David J. Harr and to The Anchoress)
UPDATE: Video.
UPDATE:James Taranto:
The Code Pinkos, of course, have the right to express their opinions, but perhaps this is an occasion on which Congress should impose some reasonable time, place and manner restrictions. If a woman on her way to an abortion clinic is entitled not to be harassed by noisome protesters, isn't the same true of men like Kevin Pannell, who have made the penultimate sacrifice [sic] for a noble cause?(Emphasis mine.)
Ouch.











Amen.
Posted by: Tully | August 26, 2005 at 11:37 AM
I saw a code pink spokescritter on Hannity and Colmes last night (Thursday) and she claimed that they were only there in an effort to demonstrate in an effort to increase the veterans' benefits. Honest, I kid you not.
When she was questioned about the signs like "maimed for a lie" and "impeach Bush/Cheney" she blamed others who might have other opinions and denied the mock coffins were ever there.
As the questioning proceeded she fell back on "my brother served in Iraq".
There were no questions concerning how her brother felt about her activities.
It would appear that code pink doesn't have the integrity to stand up for what they are doing when the spotlight is on them.
Posted by: StinKerr | August 26, 2005 at 12:29 PM
I'll bet the injured Patriots in the hospital really enjoy looking out their windows and seing flag drapped coffins, too.
I promise you if it was me in that hospital missing one or both legs and looking out and seeing that crap, I'd find away to get one of my buddies to smuggle me in a sniper rifle so I could start turning "code pink" into "puddled red".
A real time saver, too. They already have the coffins handy!!!!
Posted by: wayne | August 26, 2005 at 12:40 PM
If you --- or anyone reading this --- wants to protest the Pinko Finkos, every Friday members of Free Republic (www.freerepublic.com) stand on the opposite corner from the Sinking Pinks and show their love and respect for the United States and the magnificent US military. (On Free Republic, these protests and counter-protests are called FReeps.) I live in Texas, and I can't get there ... but if you're closer, show up and let the Dinky Pinkys know what YOU think!
For pictures of the August 19th FReep of the Pink (Missing) Links, go to http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1468039/posts.
Posted by: Ray McVeigh | August 26, 2005 at 01:00 PM
Uh, I think you guys need to calm down a little, there's like four people with signs protesting, one of them which says "Save Walter Reed Hospital" and one of them which says something about soldiers getting better benefits for soldiers. Hardly a big deal. For the record, I don't agree with protesting in front of a hospital, but come on, it's like four people.
Watch the video on CNSNews.
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewSpecialReports.asp?Page=\SpecialReports\archive\200508\SPE20050825a.html
Posted by: Justin | August 26, 2005 at 01:44 PM
I find your comment about wounded soldiers hilarious!!! Teenagers have gone over to Iraq in hopes of future dreams promised by the US Army (Money, Education and Travel)These innocent americans who were and are being injured, did not neccessarily know what was to face them. As I recall when the war started everyone expected the Iraqis to greet us with open arms. How were they suppose to know exactly what would await them there?????
Posted by: Jon | August 26, 2005 at 02:55 PM
Jon,
It's called training and briefings; that's how any soldier, from top to bottom, gets an idea of what he/she will likely face during a mission. And they *were* welcomed with open arms. Still are. Apparently you aren't reading Milblogs.
And, BTW, your sense of what is “hilarious” is rather unique.
Posted by: baldilocks | August 26, 2005 at 03:48 PM
Hmm, looking at this list of ALL coalition deaths, which includes civilians, I count 139 teenagers.
It looks like "the children" meme won't wash. I also see a lot of professional career types of all ranks on that list.
Another myth popped.
Posted by: StinKerr | August 27, 2005 at 12:33 AM
I believe I heard sometime in the last month that the average age of those serving in Iraq is 28 years old.
Children flock to U.S. convoys passing through their town and a couple of times now I've heard that suicide bombers have timed their vehicle's approach to coincide with the arrival of these children to the convoy. And the adult Iraqis have wanted us there. I don't know what percentage of the 1/5th Sunni Baathist minority is for us there or the rabble followers of the non-cleric Muqtada al Sadr but who cares?
We were greated fairly well given that the people of Iraq had to feel they had to play it cool towards us because they didn't know if Saddam was really going to remain gone and that we meant business when it came to permanently removing Saddam and restoring a government.
I served in the army for 3 years and I did not have a clue as to what it was all about. And I am sure that if I was sent to Iraq in those years I wouldn't have understood then either. But that is simply the nature of that situation as it always has been for American soldiers as well as soldiers serving other countries. It is a little sad I'll agree but not a reason for a nation to dismantle or make their military a worthless do nothing babysitter for 18 to 21 year olds.
Posted by: Steve | August 27, 2005 at 08:13 AM
Baldilocks:
Offended? Yes
Surprised? NO!
They are a warning to the right not to be as hateful, as spiteful nor as self-righteous
Posted by: Don Surber | August 27, 2005 at 01:35 PM
As an American, I'm ashamed of those protesters. As a patriot and supporter of our military, I wish someone in power could move these "Pinkos" protesters somewhere else.....Baghdad comes to mind.
Posted by: Chevy Rose | August 27, 2005 at 01:44 PM
In the past the Code Pink protesters have held signs that said "MURDERER" and "MAIMED FOR LIES".
Knowing the press would be there this week, they cleaned up their act and imported some little old ladies for sympathy.
Sadly for the protesters, they were hugely outnumbered by the D.C. Chapter of Free Republic, Rolling Thunder and various citizens who were outraged by a bunch of nincompoops bringing their politics to the gates of a hospital.
If anyone is not familiar with Code Pink it is safe to say Code Pink = Red Lite.
The FReepers will be covering the gates at Walter Reed every Friday night at 6:30 pm. All are welcome who share an appreciation for the courage and sacrifice of our Troops.
www.freerepublic.com
Posted by: flora mcdonald | August 27, 2005 at 10:20 PM
I just heard tonight that these LOW-LIFE Protestors are soon to be outnumbered by REAL-LIFE patriot soldiers I assume theyll make a " VERY BRAVE RETREAT "
reality always screws these people up because they have never done anything AT ALL with theyre lives . Next time you see them theyll be camping out for 2 weeks waiting for the next STAR WARS
Movie Or theyll be here In Oregon Held up in the top of a Ponderosa Thank god im a near-sighted squirrel hunter .
Posted by: skinner | August 27, 2005 at 11:24 PM
Skinner, I find you,re comments HIGHLY DISTURBING , at a really high place. Which makes it far worse !!!!! JUST what makes you think you can come on this post and make HIGHLY UNLIKELY accusations at crazy people LIKE YOURSELF You
are are BANISHED AND take off that TROUT MASK !!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by: skinner | August 28, 2005 at 02:17 AM
Well now I"m pissed. I had no idea this was going on, and I was living in DC for the last year. (I was a little busy getting a Masters in 10 months.)
I wish I had known. I lived far from Walter Reed (took my son there three times for pre-, surgery, and post-) but I would have made the drive to stand on the FReepers side.
Posted by: Iron Mike | August 28, 2005 at 07:15 AM
There's something here for everyone to see. I have certain folks in mind but I won't name names. You know who you are.
Posted by: StinKerr | August 28, 2005 at 07:19 PM
Uh, OK StinKerr. That's pretty much the level of discourse the right had descended to now, glad to see you're confirming my beliefs about the pro-war crowd.
Posted by: Justin | August 28, 2005 at 08:33 PM
Justin, I am on the right and pro-war--or, rather, pro-victory--and, according to you, my level of discourse is low.
If that's what you think, then why are you bothering?
Posted by: baldilocks | August 28, 2005 at 09:01 PM
Baldilocks--Sorry for the gross generalizations. I like the comment section of this board because I find the pro-war arguments here compelling and well though out (even if I strongly disagree). However, I find A LOT of the arguments that have been coming from the pro-war camp lately on the level of "if you question the war you are a traitor, a maggot and commie-liberal pinko." I see it on Fox News, Powerline, NRO etc., and it's pretty annoying--although, it the purpose is to annoy liberals, I guess it's pretty effective.
Posted by: Justin | August 29, 2005 at 07:26 AM
Yeah--I think you all are really blowing these people out of porportion--they sound like a pretty stand up group trying to get benefits for soldiers. Why is anyone who dares to criticize Bush smeared by the right?
http://www.sacbee.com/24hour/special_reports/iraq/bee/story/13489392p-14330073c.html
Posted by: Justin | August 29, 2005 at 09:53 AM
Medea Benjamin was quoted in Justin's article. More:
http://www.discoverthenetwork.com/individualProfile.asp?indid=626
excerpt
Many of the causes that Ms. Benjamin espouses are Communist in nature. For instance, most of the major anti-war demonstrations at which she has spoken were organized by the Workers World Party, a Marxist-Leninist organization that openly supports Kim Jong Il's dictatorship in North Korea and proudly proclaims its dedication to "fight[ing] against capitalism" in America's "racist, sexist society." In years past, she vehemently opposed U.S. military aid to those fighting against Communist forces in Central America.
Passionately anti-capitalist, Benjamin is widely credited as a chief organizing force behind the 1999 Seattle riots in which 50,000 protesters did millions of dollars worth of property damage in their effort to shut down meetings of the World Trade Organization.
During the last week of December 2004, Benjamin announced in Amman, Jordan that Global Exchange, Code Pink, and Families for Peace would be donating a combined $600,000 in medical supplies and cash to the terrorist insurgents who were fighting American troops in Fallujah, Iraq.
=========
Code Pink:
http://www.discoverthenetwork.com/groupProfile.asp?grpid=6149
excerpt:
For the past twelve weeks, Code Pink for Peace has staged weekly protests outside Walter Reed Army Medical Center, where many U.S. soldiers wounded in combat are treated, some of them receiving prosthetic limbs. Code Pink's intent is to condemn America's involvement in the Iraq War, and to charge the Bush administration with having led the U.S. to battle on the pretext of a lie -- that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction. One Code Pink sign indicated that soldiers are being sent overseas to "die for a lie." One can well imagine how such a message might distress the patients inside Walter Reed hospital, or their families.
Code Pink for Peace is a self-described "grassroots peace and social justice movement" formed in December 2002 to join the cadre of anti-war groups protesting against America's then-impending war in Iraq. Code Pink was founded by four experienced activists and hardcore Communists - Jodie Evans, Medea Benjamin, Diane Wilson, and a radical Wiccan activist calling herself Starhawk. Ms. Evans is the nominal leader of the organization, which works closely with Medea Benjamin's group Global Exchange, which in turn maintains strong ties to the Communist Workers World Party (WWP). Code Pink also works hand-in-hand with United For Peace and Justice, whose leader Leslie Cagan is a longtime devotee of Fidel Castro and the Socialist Party USA. Throughout the 1990s, many of the Marxists currently working for Code Pink organized anti-free trade protests - some of them violent - and filed numerous high-profile lawsuits that forced American corporations to spend millions of dollars defending themselves.
Posted by: Steve | August 29, 2005 at 11:50 AM
Yeah, Medea Benjamin is a bit of a nutcase. Again, while I don't agree with protesting outside of a hospital, holding up signs to get veterans more benefits and to bring troops home is hardly something to get so worked up about.
Posted by: Justin | August 29, 2005 at 12:06 PM
Justin:
Before the Code Pink protesters in front of Walter Reed started receiving so much attention--i.e., before last week--they were holding up signs that said things like "Maimed for a Lie" and "Enlist Here to Die For Halliburton." Neither of those sentiments has a blessed thing to do with veteran benefits or bringing troops home. The Code Pinks are taunting a physically wounded group with the intent to demoralize. That's what we're getting "so worked up about."
Disagree with the general tide here if you must, but do it honestly. Stop pretending that Code Pink's motives are pristine and pure and pretending as if we're being unreasonable and/or hysterical over CP's efforts to "help" the troops. It's becoming boring.
Posted by: baldilocks | August 29, 2005 at 04:55 PM
I will agree the protests are in pretty poor taste at least. I'll also admit that my extreme dislike (to put it lightly) of this administration and the way they've conducted the war makes me much more sympathetic to protesters, no matter how distatesful. But to me, four people with some signs in front of a veteran's hospital isn't a big deal.
If you really believed the president lied to the country to get us into a war (which, even if you disagree with the position, is at least arguable position), what would the appropriate response be?
Posted by: Justin | August 29, 2005 at 05:49 PM
Something other than taunting wounded soldiers and their families, perhaps?
Posted by: jaed | August 30, 2005 at 02:08 PM
Well, the anti-war left aren't the only people guilty of taunting the dead and the wounded-see this link below for a Baptist church protesting at the funeral of a gay service member killed in Iraq. Absolutely disgusting.
While the city turned out in support of the Doyles, six protesters associated with the Westboro Baptist Church in Kansas demonstrated outside the funeral home. Members of the group, which has a history of picketing funerals of military personnel killed by roadside explosives, held signs such as "God blew up the troops" and "Thank God for dead soldiers."
The group says it believes the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks and the deaths of soldiers in Iraq are signs from God that America is an "abomination."
http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050829/NEWS01/508290394
Posted by: Justin | September 01, 2005 at 08:30 AM
Justin,
Perhaps you can help me with this. I can't find anything in the story saying that the soldier was gay. Indeed I note that it mentions his surviving wife.
The "church" in question is one operated by Fred Phelps and the congregation is chiefly made up of his relatives.
They have a nasty habit of showing up at as many military funerals as they can reach and protest in the nastiest way.
There have been cases where the target town had some advance knowledge of their pending appearance and have taken steps to silence them. One of my favorites was a town in New England where the Boston Police Pipe Band showed up and drowned them out every time they started shouting. Another town surrounded them with police cars and other vehicles so that they couldn't be seen or heard from the church where the funeral was taking place.
They are scum, Jason, and they have been derided as such right here on this site as well as every other right of center site that I've seen.
Some milbloggers want a piece of him, too. I know he better not show up in Chicago or he'll meet with a terrible accident. A certain former paratrooper has made such a promise and I don't think he's alone in the sentiment.
Posted by: StinKerr | September 01, 2005 at 04:59 PM
Justin,
Fred Phelps--the "clergyman" who lead the protest at the funeral of this "gay" service member killed in Iraq--is a liberal Democrat who has raised money for two of the last three Democrat presidential candidates. His son, Fred, Jr., was invited to and attended both Clinton inaugurations.
That particular tar-baby is stuck to your side, no matter how much you guys try to flick it off.
Posted by: baldilocks | September 01, 2005 at 05:25 PM
As a self proclaimed clergyman myselfff I find this Fred Phelps
JERK uniquely disgusting I imagine him shpeaking with a lipthpp " Hi Im your PATHTOR FFREDY PHLPTHSS FFFF Welcome to
the Parristhh MY Thon FFAA ready
Junior wil Now thow yo tha Child
Ponograthy thection and in thaa tammy Phaay wing PROTHEED
Posted by: skinner | September 10, 2005 at 12:18 AM