The American Legion's War

to the greatest people on earth!

Greetings from the Gonzo! I have been engaged with writing letters to the papers here regarding several issues. One is the statements from Thomas Cadmus, the National Commander of the American Legion.

As reorted from American progress, who linked to the Editors and Publishers article, the
American Legion had a conference in Hawaii. It must be one of those sacrifices that Bush suggested a day after "hanging loose" in Crawford. Anyway, I responded on a local level to the national Commander's comments, knowing there is a local Post here. The letter also went to the Seattle Times. And lo and behold, the local Post 141 repsonded.

In typical right wing fashion I must add. The entire text of my letter is below:

"According to the Bill of Rights, Americans are allowed to peaceably assemble. American Legion President Thomas Cadmus called for an end to all "public protests" and "media events" against the war. "The American Legion," he said, "will stand against any one and any group..."

One of the central pillars of fascism is the suppression of opposition by censorship and terror. The delegates at the American Legion at the convention Cadmus was addressing then voted to use whatever means necessary to ensure the united backing of the American people..."

Despite the recent polls that say 90% of America supports dissension, only 38% believe the war in Iraq is valid, and a slightly better approval rate for the President, the American Legion has decided to "declare war" against the Constitution and protesters.

This is one American that won't set foot in a Legion Hall again."

"In a recent letter to the editor it was suggested that the American Legion was in some was less than fully in support of our troops," says the first paragraph of this letter. It was signed by Tom Arhontas, Melody Bryant, and Jim Cooley, all local Post 141 administrators. Now, I ask you, what in my letter can be construed as implying that the Legion was not supporting the troops? This is how the right works. In a debate, they change the subject. Their sing-song talking points, like "support the troops" is what they have to revolve around. As you can see from my letter, I started by pointing out that the right to protest is in our Constitution, and how Cadmus' comments were in direct contradiction to the Constitution.

Then I was accused of taking Mr. Cadmus' comments out of context. Having quoted the Editor and Publisher article, where Mr. cadmus is quoted as saying that all public protests and media events against the war be ended. However, in their response they failed to say just how I abused that context. I also used the quote, which they also reprinted, that the Legion would stand against any one or any group that demoralizes the troops and encourages the enemies. In the full text, and in the midst of the histroical condition of camp Casey in Crawford being in full swing, the references and implications via memories of Jane Fonda to current pioneer Cindy Sheehan are missed only by those who can't read. So they satrted with a twist, and then ran. Here they are stating I took comments out of context, and don't support it. They claimed I made an inference, and offered no support.

Remember when talking to right wingers, that they have a hard time staying on task. Not necessarily Republicans, but Neocon supporters do. And that is the case here. They went on to say that they hoped Americans would voice their opinions by writing letters.

Well, not only did they miss the point that I made, they miss the contents of the Constitution. And this is how they like to communicate to the masses. They make accusations, yet fail to support them. Consistent tracking easily takes this to task. And that is what I did in a follow up letter. I asked for the evidence of their claims, and noted that they completely dimissed my second paragraph by ignoring it. A rather weighty omission in my consideration. I can fully understand their position in this. I exposed them to the light, and it blinded them, and they don't like being exposed as being un-American. Yet, they only brought forth accusations they could not support, and they never really addressed fully what I said. In my follow up letter, I asked for clarification as to what Cadmus meant by "whatever means necessary" to ensure unity.

Mind you, I was rather candid in my view of the political philosophy that drives the Bush adminisrtration. I basically accused the American Legion of supporting a fascsit government, and actually colluding with them. And that's how I see it. The Legion has no idea about my blog, so they aren't aware of how I see it in detail. That to me is neither here nor there. My point, and not overly stated in my opinion, was that the Legion is acting in ways that fundamentally contradict the Constitution. It does not matter one whit whether or not some one is demoralized or encouraged, the Bill of Rights guarantees me the right to peacably assembly. And one thing that the cons like to do is make you feel like YOU don't support the troops by protesting. They fail to make the disticntion that I can protest the policies of the President as well as support the troops. And when you consider that the New York Times reported as of a month ago that the Pentagon is STILL behind in updating armor for the troops, I have to ask, just how is the administration supporting the troops? I pay my taxes, which the rich don't, that these troops can do their job. That's my minimal support. Yet they go into battle unprotected. Or making their own armor. So remember that we are protesting the lies and policies that got us into Iraq, we have the right to do so, no matter what any one feels about it.

I just thought I'd share this with you so you can remember that debating with a neocon is easy. They like to emphasize the ireelevant or in my case, the incorrect. They play on emotions. They ignore the facts, and often, as in my case, the context.

I'll let you know if anything further develops with this. I have my doubts it will. The Cons are getting desparate though. This is seen all over the map, as they rush to make their image good regardless of their glaring shortcomings. They are scrambling to protect their voter base in light of declining polls. So they'll stay on the party line regardless of how stupid it sounds. They just can't think for themselves yet.

And remember, our goal is not to "defeat" right wingers. Our goal should be to point out the facts and truth. The kind that got Mike Brown of FEMA fired. The kind that now aims at Mike Chertoff of FEMA. Our goal should be to open their eyes to the truth. There will always be a difference of opinions. That is what makes America such a great country. But as we have seen, the Cons have hijacked the Republican Party, and their abuse of democracy is a threat to us all. But the polls show that Americans are waking upo and wil throw off this administration. Then we can again return to making this country a home of justice and liberty for all.

Just thought I'd drop this nugget I lifted off another blog. Interesting take from the Amerikan Legion:


President William J. Clinton
The White House
Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. President:
The American Legion, a wartime veterans organization of nearly three-million members, urges the immediate withdrawal of American troops participating in “Operation Allied Force.”
The National Executive Committee of The American Legion, meeting in Indianapolis today, adopted Resolution 44, titled “The American Legion’s Statement on Yugoslavia.” This resolution was debated and adopted unanimously.
Mr. President, the United States Armed Forces should never be committed to wartime operations unless the following conditions are fulfilled:

-That there be a clear statement by the President of why it is in our vital national interests to be engaged in hostilities;
-Guidelines be established for the mission, including a clear exit strategy;
-That there be support of the mission by the U.S. Congress and the American people; and
-That it be made clear that U.S. Forces will be commanded only by U.S. officers which we acknowledge are superior military leaders.

It is the position of The American Legion, which I am sure is shared by the majority of Americans, that three of the above listed conditions have not been met in the current joint operation with NATO (“Operation Allied Force”).
In no case should America commit its Armed Forces in the absence of clearly defined objectives agreed upon by the U.S. Congress in accordance with Article I, Section 8, of the Constitution of the United States.

Sincerely,

HAROLD L. “BUTCH” MILLER
National Commander