Army/Navy Game & injured US troops....

Colleges & Universities Service Academy Parents
21

<p>Shogun: I’m not sure where the spitting on wounded soldiers information came from, I personally did not hear of that happening while I was working there earlier this year. I can however report of a military physician being spit on while in uniform at a store in Olympia, WA; home of Evergreen State. It is amazing what people will do to try and get their ideas across. I’m just glad this didn’t happen to me; I’m not sure how I would respond. </p>

<p>About Shogun’s mentioning of the decision not being left to one person or a group of like-minded people: This isn’t a decision that needs to be made…it is just plain common sense. I’m not one to harp on morals or anything like that b/c I know I’ve got my vices; but I don’t know of many people who would think it appropriate to protest a war in front of a hospital. It makes me wonder when there is only one group who does these protests in front of WRAMC; there are tons of other anti-war groups and even they usually stay away.</p>

22

<p>Jamzmom and Prayerfullmom:</p>

<p>I think you and I agree on more things than you may think. </p>

<p>I just think that the media has become our mommy and our daddy in America. Some in the media would now be our teacher as well with campaigns that assert that America’s public schools are are taught by anti-religion, anti-american, anti-creationist intellectuals. I think a lot of Americans assume that because the transfer of information is so immediate, looks and sounds so “real”, it must also be factual. </p>

<p>I agree with you in that I find their choice of location distasteful. However I shudder to think of a world where we all thought and acted alike. It wouldn’t be human, let alone American :)</p>

23

<p>Shogun wrote:
“However I shudder to think of a world where we all thought and acted alike. It wouldn’t be human, let alone American”</p>

<p>I’m going to argue two points here:
1)There are situations where we do think and act alike. The quickest example I can give is murder. (I don’t want to debate what murder is) I can think of no ethnicity, culture, religion, etc that condones murder. It is okay to think and act alike on some issues, it’s not wrong, rather it usually it goes along with “common sense.”</p>

<p>And my other argument:
2)Although we may not always think or act alike whatever happened to majority rules. It seems in today’s society we have to appease every little group. Recent examples can be found in the “Christmas Debate” or in the fight to have “under God” removed from the Pledge. I will expand upon the Pledge fight. Just because one person in California (who likes to file suits on behalf of his daughter) doesn’t like the fact that we have the word “God” in our Pledge we are violating some sacred right. In my eyes he is just going to have to deal with it until he can convince enough people to make his position a majority. </p>

<p>Now, I have not put enough thought into either of my arguments to make them applicable to every single case or situation possible to the imagination. I am sure I could come up with examples where my own arguments would not apply to my own feelings. So if I’m ever nominated to the Supreme Court please do not hold these thoughts against me during my confirmation hearing, haha.</p>

24

<p>Introduction about the spitting on Vietnam veterans urban legend. For the most part, the story has never been verified as mentioned in the article.</p>

<p>STORIES ABOUT spat-upon Vietnam veterans are like mercury: Smash one and six more appear. It’s hard to say where they come from. For a book I wrote in 1998 I looked back to the time when the spit was supposedly flying, the late 1960s and early 1970s. I found nothing. No news reports or even claims that someone was being spat on. </p>

<p>Full story at: <a href=“http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0430-21.htm[/url]”>http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0430-21.htm&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

25

<p>Free speech is at the core of our constitutional rights.
Government may regulate free speech only in a very narrow sense, e.g. the regulation of your right to yell fire in a crowded theater.
Without getting too technical, government may regulate free speech if there is a particularized need, i.e. for purposes of public safety. The governmental regulation, however, must be specific to the type of speech being regulated.</p>

<p>Government, especially local government [the local yokel kind], frequently overreaches in this regard. For example, if the KKK wants to speak at City Hall and everybody is kept away from the speech for “public safety” reasons. I think the Supreme Court would find that local government can better provide for the public safety with the addition of officers rather than keeping everybdoy away. [The reason that Austin, TX is now being sued.]</p>

<p>Freedom of speech, however, does not imply common sense or even morality; as others have mentioned already. </p>

<p>The balance that government seeks to find with regard to “rights” is often conflicting. Especially in times of war. That is why the current argument that Pres. Bush propounds over beomg able to wiretap without a warrant is particularly specious. Overreaching by the President–asserting executive authority to “protect the public”–has been argued before. I believe it is best characterized as: “I am from the government and I am here to help.” [I think it was Truman that tried to nationalize the steel industry at the end of WWII or beginning of Korean war.] The courts [you know those evil judges that make law instead of interpret it] have wisely brought the putative Kings down to earth.</p>

<p>As long as they are peaceful and don’t violate established and accepted regulations, [for example, McClennon county recently passed an ordiance that bans assembly along certain public highways located in rural areas, i.e. in front of President Bush’s ranch. It will be interesting to see how a challenge to that law would be examined.] then it is clear they have a right to protest where they are.</p>

<p>The thing is, someday, believe it or not, it might be your turn to avail yourself of a right to free speech [which is specifically provided for in the Constitution] or a right to privacy [which is not specifically provided for in the Constitution]. Then, you will better appreciate those that have asserted and fought for those rights before you. </p>

<p>Shogun, I agree with you regarding sources. It’s too easy to assert a position these days w/out any basis for what is being said. I only provide the previous reference by way of introducing the notion that spitting on veterans, while it may have happened, was not widely reported at the time.</p>

<p>Beside, as the end of the day, I guess it’s just a group of people that have too much time on their hands. Sort of like people that post to anonymous college threads on such weighty topics as constitutional rights. Gotta go . . . have to finish writing my next lawsuit.</p>

26

<p>Bill! My favorite resident attorney! Go fix you a scotch& join us! You can only solve the world’s problems with scotch. I’ve done it a time or two so I know it works. Martinis only work on Tuesday’s problems though… Cheers :)</p>

<p>Truly, where is this goin’ exactly guys? I did not read any disagreement on their rights to protest. I did not read anything about spitting on folks from within this thread. Did I miss something? Its just that I feel that this particular group picked a really bad place to protest. I’ve read their cause. Alot of people share it. I just find it in bad taste & disrespectful to those having to cross paths with these people. Its a good debate that there needs to be a balance and we’re fortunate that we live where we can jump on either side of the scale or not at all. But something Navy2010 said sticks in my head & heart: “common decency. Let the wounded heal in peace”. Perfect. In my little bitty humble opinion, these people would be better served going to where the power is & its not at the hospitals where the wounded souls are. Its just sad is all. I don’t like people who kick puppies either.</p>

<p>HA! Bill, can’t I argue that it is a public safety issue? The wounded on crutches trying to exit out of the hospital and tripping over one of the protestors? Won’t fly will it. Lemme think on it some more… ;)</p>

27

<p>I live near a large VA hospital in Southern California, and can report that there are no angry anti-war protesters spitting on wounded veterans here. (However, I have seen more and more young men at the beach and in public places with artifical legs and missing hands in the past year.) Therefore, I was quite perplexed and frankly downright skeptical about the Walter Reed story. (As Bill has pointed out, even the Vietnam era tales of “spitting on soldiers” is an urban myth.) Also, from what I’ve read and know to be true, many Americans are against the war in Iraq for political and humanitarian reasons, first and foremost being the dead (2,100+) and seriously wounded (50,000+) American soldiers, marines, and sailors. </p>

<p>Therefore, I called the Code Pink offices in Washington, D.C., San Francisco, and Los Angeles, to get more information about what actually is going on at Walter Reed. From what I learned, it is not a boisterous protest, but a dignified vigil held two hours each Friday evening. I spoke with one young woman who had personally participated in the vigil. She said that a number of veterans groups also participate in the vigil, including Goldstar families, and Veterans for Peace. Here is a description of the vigil from the Code Pink Washington, D.C. website: </p>

<p>“The Walter Reed Vigil is a very discreet, dignified project taking place for two hours each Friday evening between 7 and 9 pm. We want those who have paid a terrific price for their country to be kept close to our hearts and minds. We don’t call for you to be honored with parades and flags; others will do that. We are calling on the country to honor its veterans, active duty, reserves, and National Guard, with full benefits, commitment to long-term health care, and an economy that will provide good jobs, hopefully union jobs.
… a small, humble vigil of ten people or so,<br>
Support Our Troops. Full Benefits for Our Vets. Bring the Troops Home.”</p>

<p>==========================================</p>

<p>Let’s all support our Constitution and the Bill of Rights, especially the First Amendment.</p>

28

<p>All I can do is laugh. “it is not a boisterous protest, but a dignified vigil held two hours each friday evening”…“She said that a number of veterans groups also participate”</p>

<p>They are correct in that it is not a protest like those seen at WTO protests or the like, however, I do not agree with their characterization of it as a “dignified vigil.” I have not been at WRAMC since November, but I know for a fact that the signs held when I was there were rarely “dignified.” I can say for a fact from direct, face to face communications with soldiers who are recovering at WRAMC that NONE, I repeat NONE, of those I talked to felt the protesters had their interests at heart. If they have their interests at heart why don’t they donate some train cars to take the soldiers to the Navy-Army game like the people that this thread was originally about? (we hijacked it soon thereafter)</p>

<p>They also make sure to say that “veteran’s groups” are also involved. The one veteran’s groups you mention is an anti-war group. </p>

<p>I also like how they throw a “hopefully union jobs” at the end. I don’t know much about the group, but an interesting quote.</p>

<p>On another note, where in the world did the spitting on soldiers at Walter Reed come from? That definately DID NOT come from this thread. The only spitting incident mentioned was one that occured in Olympia Washington to a military physician. No one in this thread was debating the merits of the war, we were simply debating the necessity to protest outside of WRAMC.</p>

<p>For the edification of some: I am currently a medical student who has worked at Walter Reed for over four months starting in July of this year. I have worked directly in the care of wounded soldiers in both the Surgery and Psychiatry departments. I have been there to see the soldiers as they are brought off the bus into the cast room were surgical triage is done and have seen the soldiers who have been there for over a year waiting to be med-boarded out of the Army. I am speaking from direct experience with both the soldiers and the protestors. </p>

<p>I have no problem with the protestors and their free speech, I would however, like to see them move. If they won’t move from WRAMC at least move 200 yards down the sidewalk away from the gate. They would still be in front of Walter Reed, but at least then the soldiers don’t have to walk through them to leave the base if they aren’t driving.</p>

29

<p>The spitting was mentioned in Shoguns comment #19. I think he/she was referring to the frontpage.com article that referred to an “re-emerging anti-American movement” and referred readers to its article entitled “Spitting on the Few, The Proud . . .”<br>
A roundabout way of introducing the spitting legend to this thread . . .</p>

<p>USNA09mom. Kudos for contacting the source directly. Whether one chooses to believe what they told USNA09 or not, at least she took the time to ask the source directly. As my father used to tell me: “You can learn something from everybody, even if learning how to not be foolish from a fool.”</p>

<p>While the veteran’s group may be “anti-war,” I don’t think that cheapens their claim to credibility anymore than “pro-war” veteran’s groups. [Are there such groups out there?] Assuming its members are legitimately veterans, they have developed a perspective on the war the same as any other group of similarly situated veterans.</p>

<p>As regards Goldstar families, on their web site it says: “We as families of soldiers who have died as a result of war are organizing to be a positive force in our world to bring our country’s sons and daughters home from Iraq, to minimize the ‘human cost’ of this war, and to preven other families from the pain we are feeling as the result of our losses.”
It seems difficult to disagree with this mission statement. I don’t see a nefarious purpose here but I am sure that others might.</p>

30

<p>Oh . . .I think we all agree that common sense and decency are two qualities severely lacking in America today. Unfortunately, for my children, I don’t see it getting any better in the near future.</p>

31

<p>kp
The only problem with your examples of “murder” and “majority rules” is that neither is protected under free speech, and neither is a good example of what might be considered a decision requiring “common sense” in the context of legal free speech. Murder is obviously not legal, and “majority rules” is not the law of the land (not even in a presidential election as we have an electoral vote system.) Free speech is about exactly the opposite of “majority rules”–inherent in it’s concept is protection of the minority opinion, and it IS the law of the land–.</p>

<p>“God” in the pledge is a relatively new addition (mid 1950’s I believe) added by Congress to fuel anti-communist feelings in America. If you ask the average American he/she thinks it was put there by our fore-fathers. Same with “In God We Trust” on our money. It was added during the Civil War, but I’ll bet if you asked 10 people on the street the majority will be uninformed and assume it has always been there and must have been put there by the founding fathers. Just an example of a lot of rhetoric going around based on false assumptions, a lot of it fueled by our fair and balanced and obviously impartial media.</p>

32

<p>I’m smilin’ a bit while I read the latest posts here. I think its all this complexity in cyber human relationships. Emotions seem to have snuck in trying to solve a debate over said group’s constitutional rights to protest. In reading back, I find no post where it has been doubted that they have the right. The only doubt on my part was about their decision to protest at this particular location. When I read usna09mom’s thoughts “Therefore, I was quite perplexed and frankly downright skeptical about the Walter Reed story. (As Bill has pointed out, even the Vietnam era tales of “spitting on soldiers” is an urban myth.)”, I am more lost than ever. What was the Walter Reed story to which you refer? All I got was that there were some protestors in front of the hospital. Not sure what you’re skeptical about. Can you clarify? Shogun’s earlier statement, “Frankly, I doubt the complete truthfullness of the reports of protestors spitting on wounded veterans in front of Walter Reed.”, is where I got lost I think. I’m just so confused & I swear ya’ll do that on purpose cause you know I can’t keep up… :)</p>

<p>I get what ya’ll are saying. From what Code Pink’s website tells us, they are doing a silent “vigil” to support our troops & thats their right. Its constitutionally good and all that. But what I can’t seem to grasp is why WRAMC? Does their vigil help these soldier’s healing process in any way or does it hinder it with a mental bang-up job? I don’t know. I’m no great mind just a mom who wouldn’t want it in my son’s face if he were there. All I know is that it makes me feel yucky bad for the wounded who are dealing with so much, to have to deal with this at the very gates where they are trying to return home. I find myself liking KP more with every post. I applaude the great things he’s doing in service to this country.</p>

33

<p>If you guys want to do something positive for our injured vets check out this link.
This group is building a rehab center for the 1,000’s of men and women hurt in Iraq and Afghanistan. </p>

<p><a href=“Home | Intrepid Fallen Heroes Fund”>Home | Intrepid Fallen Heroes Fund;

34

<p>All I can say is that I sure hope the folks holding up the candles in front of Walter Reed remember to say a prayer or two for those injured inside that fought, with life and limb, for their very ability to assemble. And a protected right or not, NO ONE has the right to injure these poor kids, or their families, further.<br>
Assemble and be heard? yes.
Do it decently. Have some ethics. Not required, but its what makes our society humane.</p>

<p>Bossf51 again to the rescue: what a positive way for our voices to be heard!</p>

35

<p>Boss thanks for the positive link & Navy2010 = :slight_smile: I wanted to add that even though this Code Pink as a group might be doing things they deem as great in fundraising for the soldiers, making their voices heard in Washington, ect., it may be a little niave to think that every member of this group is on the same page. There might be those who would use this organization as their own soap box to follow their own agenda. The “signs” that I think should show support might not be so supportive (I haven’t seen them but KP had seen them & hinted that they weren’t too nice) and their silent “vigil” they claim might not be so silent. Indeed, there are two sides to every story but I feel sure there are those in this group, as in any group out there, who only wish for their five seconds of fame and to be seen on some media outlet who sadly gives them the opportunity. To simple it up for my sake, they’re allowed to do what they do, I just don’t have to like where they’re doin’ it. Like I said, kinda like kicking puppies. Sad, sad, sad. But its only my personal opinion & doesn’t have to effect everyone else’s. Its good conversation & I really do enjoy hearing other people’s thoughts.</p>

36

<p>Thank you kp for your first person account of events at Walter Reed…</p>

<p>For those who prefer a picture…</p>

<p>Anti-War Protests Target Wounded at Army Hospital
By Marc Morano
CNSNews.com Senior Staff Writer
August 25, 2005</p>

<p><a href=“http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewSpecialReports.asp?Page=\SpecialReports\archive\200508\SPE20050825a.html[/url]”>http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewSpecialReports.asp?Page=\SpecialReports\archive\200508\SPE20050825a.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>click on the link above where you can view the video regarding ‘Code Pink’ and Walter Reed Hospital.</p>

<p>In addition there are articles on this subject at the Washington Times ( Article 1 of 3, Article ID: 200509011356200029) but one has to register and pay a fee to view them.</p>

<p>Ok, some may say that both of these are a “right-wing” new sources, what I wonder is why the so-called main stream press did not cover this story?</p>

<p>Maybe because as the latest study demonstrates the main stream press is not so main stream…“Media Bias Is Real, Finds UCLA Political Scientist”.( <a href=“http://www.newsroom.ucla.edu/page.asp?RelNum=6664[/url]”>http://www.newsroom.ucla.edu/page.asp?RelNum=6664&lt;/a&gt; )</p>

<p>Most of you have probably read this poem before (sorry, I do not know the author); nonetheless, I thought this might be a good place to post it…</p>

<p>It is the soldier, not the reporter,
Who has given us freedom of the press.
It is the soldier, not the poet,
Who has given us freedom of speech.
It is the soldier, not the campus organizer,
Who has given us the freedom to demonstrate.
It is the soldier,
Who salutes the flag,
Who serves beneath the flag,
And whose coffin is draped by the flag,
Who allows the protester to burn the flag.</p>

<p>So just maybe when our troops return home from battle with life altering injuries, I suggest that they deserve a hellava lot more respect and appreciation than what “Code Pink” is offering in their “vigils”!</p>

<p>Finally, I have not read anywhere on these posts that any of us oppose individuals First Amendment right…just that many support common decency!</p>

37

<p>Thank you Boss and prayerful mom for the links. The video link posted is, I think, a good representation of what actually goes on in front of WRAMC.</p>

38

<p>Boss…</p>

<p>thanks for the info on the Fallen Hero Fund…</p>

<p>Charity Navigator, a group that rates charities, gave this particualar fund a 4 star rating, the highest rating they have.</p>

<p><a href=“http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm/bay/search.summary/orgid/3906.htm[/url]”>http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm/bay/search.summary/orgid/3906.htm&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

39

<p>oops…I meant “particular”…really could use a spell check here!</p>

40

<p>Everyone’s right to peaceably assemble and speak freely are protested under the First Amendment of the Constitution (but are these DEMONstrators peaceful? Could spitting on others constitute assault?). </p>

<p>I seriously question the motives of those who would protest outside of a military hospital - that just adds insult to injury. Perhaps some law of decency has been violated - seems indecent to me!</p>