"Cindy Sheehan & White Supremacy"

White people do care more about white people dying. But don't Blacks and other minorities also care more when their own are dying?

My allegiance is not to the sorry-ass volunteers (white or minorities) who allow themselves to get involved in this mess (poverty is no excuse for killing). My allegiance is to the Iraqi people, and to Arabs in general, because of the despicable treatment they are receiving at the hands of western "civilization."

What I take from your post Tamara, is that Tamara K. Nopper doesn't have her name splashed across the headlines in the media. Tamara K. Nopper does not have people cheering: Tamara K. Nopper! Tamara K. Nopper! Tamara K. Nopper!

As a revolutionary who happens to have white skin, I appreciate this article a lot. I agree with everything said, however I'd like to add that Cindy's activism is not intentionally (or consciously) excluding black victims of war, their families, and activists from the discussion table. I agree that Cindy's activism has seen the public light of day because she is white. But you're leaving out the reason, and that's due to the ideologically-driven U.S. corporate media who decides unilaterally (or at least without public input)what information gets or doesn't get disclosed to the American public. If Cindy were a black, hispanic, or Native American mother taking on this daunting task, the public would not be made aware of it...because of the mainstream U.S. media controlled by government/corporate interests which are always inherently racist and classist. Countless activists are already aware of this yet still remain silent on how to effectively challenge this fourth estate of corruption. There is alternative media including global networks like the IMC however most of the American populace is still unaware of these enormous informational movements as momentous as they are[read: because of the U.S. corporate media that essentially quarantines the information from the public psyche].

Cindy Sheehan is one lone woman with a mission. I'm sure if she read this very article she would burst into tears for not being more conscious and conscientious of the racial issue, so please don't blame her personally. You can feel the love in her heart from a mile away. So please assume that she would most likely apologize even though it's not her fault personally. As for her son's ideological perspective before he was killed, I'd be very curious to know. But even if Casey was pro-war/pro-Bush/pro-establishment/etc. that still wouldn't be a knock against his mother and her activism because she's tackling a larger, more all-encompassing issue. But yeah, if he was pro-war, she would be morally obligated to admit it to those listening (for the victims who fell to his gun), deal with it, and move on from it. He's in a higher plane and I'm quite sure understands now why he shouldn't have been in Iraq to begin with.

I pray that revolutionaries from all races will unite under one banner once and for all to take on the vicious beast of U.S. led global empire.

i agree with everything you've said and also with the above comment. sometimes cindy is too 'american pie' for me. but i'm glad that it has revived the movement a little bit. this is a deeply racist and sexist country and we have to
constantly challenge this and stay aware of it if we are to change anything.

Identity politics exist but become silly when pushed into a kind of b&w filter for what all is happening.

Of course, U.S. politics is racist and classist, but to tag Cindy Sheehan with the "Cindy Sheehan solidarity battle cry: When white people die, we all cry! When white people die, we all cry!" that's just silly.

The peace movement, like life itself, is best viewed in full living color.

...when you divide the peace movement into white vs black vs whatever. It's a class thing, a profit motive, not a race thing. Control over the last drops of the world's oil supply is the next World War III, and it won't matter what color you are, only how thirsty you are for resources.

Keep in mind that Nopper thinks that John Brown was a racist also.

There is a certain illogic in her writing that keeps jumping out. That is, what would Nopper suggest that Sheehan be doing instead? Or John Brown, who was, in fact, working under the leadership of Harriet Tubman, when he went to Harpers Ferry to incite rebellion.

"Finally, Sheehan has been able to avoid important questions about where her white son stood on important political issues and whether or not people should even care about his death."

What the hell is Nopper talking about? Sheehan's son joined up and went to fight in Iraq. He was killed there. She is stating that this war is a war fought for oil and imperialist interests. She is calling for immediate withdrawal and challenging the president, Congress and anyone else who defends the U.S. presence there. That doesn't sound like a defense of her son's political stance or actions.

I don't expect Cindy Sheehan to ever say, "Yeah, the Iraqi resistance had every right to kill his ass." Few parents openly call for the murder of their children. If Sheehan only talked about her son and not about the tens of thousands of Iraqis who have been murdered, then it would be accurate to call her a racist. But she does talk about them.

All this doesn't mean that we should uncritically support Sheehan in her protests. We must acknowledge that she has played an important role, but don't expect her - or anyone else - to give us all the answers. Nopper's critique is all too similar to Kirsten Anderberg's. Throw mud from the sidelines while someone is actually doing some organizing. "The fact that...she was seen smiling on camera when she was finally arrested in DC...speaks volumes." Oh, Ms.Nopper, have you ever been arrested? Sometimes you smile, sometimes you grimace, sometimes you cuss. But you don't expect to be criticized for taking the arrest.

Finally, in Nopper's words, "Rarely, if ever, have white people had to connect their struggles to non-whites in hopes of getting some sympathy or support." What garbage. People of color and their resistance have propelled the last century of struggle in the United States. Without those acts of resistance, we cannot imagine women's liberation, gay liberation or any of the movements that we look to for inspiration.

Why does Cindy have to speak for minorities and why are you flaming her for a system that she did not create. So now, she is responsible for racism and the fact that she has the privilege of gaining lots of white support whereas, a black activist may not be so supported? This also seems to suggest that minorities want similar attention and makes the false assumption that they oppose the war as much as Cindy. If this is a discussion about racism in the country, that's another matter, but I agree with the last poster, this comes off as mud slinging for someone who is trying to make a statement. What should she have done instead?

You just cannot do anything useful in this country without some of the people who say they are fighting for justice tearing you down. That is just the way it is. Maybe always been that way everywhere. Just because someone has an interest in justice, does not make them wise, does not make them truly compassionate, does not mean they even have some good sense. Sometimes your enemies are more deserving of respect than your allies. Life is complex and the modern society has promoted the soundbyte mentality to such a degree.

Cindy Sheehan is simply not a problem, nor is she the answer and throwing out the good, because it is not perfect does not make a better world.

I dunno. Your overall tone has a racist vibration to it. Perhaps some envy? Jealousy? This isn't the Vietnam War you know. This is a volunteer army, not a draft. It's not like the only option is running to Canada. This appears to me as an attempt to hit Sheehan from the 'Left'. But just what kind of 'Left' are you? You sound like some political correctness poster child, wearing your proclaimed victimhood on your sleeve like stripes. Why anyone would want to attack Sheehan from the left is beyond me. Hinting at financial shenanigans-how Bill O'Reilly! I just don't trust this posting as being what it claims to be.

And yet I remain the lone voice here who dares mention the blame of the corporate media. How sad.

Tamara K. Nopper and Kirsten Anderberg should unite to form a movement whose purpose is to bash Cindy Sheehan. The can call this self-serving movement "LAME" which stands for "Look At Me Everyone." I will remind Ms Nopper that Cindy's new book is titled "Not One More Mother's Child." That applies to mothers of every color, not just white mothers.

People like Nopper and Anderberg make me want to wretch. Their so-called "critiques" of Cindy Sheehan are driven by pure jealousy, nothing more.

Yep, proof of the racism at Camp Casey.

I've read a number of her writings and there is definitely an air of anger towards any white activist, though she also vents towards male activists, as well. Her points about mysogynist men in activist circles is not new, and I don't have a problem with her views on this, though it does generalize. She basically says that one can not be white and be anti-racist, an assertion that is as blatantly racist as saying that one can not be Jewish and be [fill in the blank] or whatever. Her views are purely black and white which does not distinguish herself from any number of linear thinkers, such as extreme fundamentalists.

Ok I aggree that the motivations for the manner in wich Cindy Sheehan was built up were at best unexamend, at worst blatantly opportunistic. I aggree that Sheehan's suffering was placed above the suffering of Iraqi mothers, and mothers of other soldiers.

I agree that this was racist opportunism.

I do not aggree with the assertion that Sheehan was responsible for this opportunism.

I do not agree with the inuendo that because she is white, her suffering was less relevant to the common struggle.

I beleave that Sheehan is probably trying in earnist to deal with her son's death in the most moral, and principled manner she could. I havn't seen anything by her that would indicate otherwise. I respect her for that.

I don't think it's honest to assume that Cindy didn't try to dissuade her son from joining the army. I think it's oppurtunism in it's own right to use this assumption to build ones self up.

It's fair to accuse the leadership of the peace movement of acting racist, in that they (specificly men like Todd Gitlin) have promoted a politic of reconciliation with killers, and withheld that focus, and solidarity from the true victims of that brutality.

Now to the bones of this shit..

I feel it's wrong to assert that because the current leadership of the peace issue is acting in a manner that is both racist, and distructive to us all, that this means social justice activists have always or are uniformly this way. I know a great number of people that feel excluded from this issue by the issue's mis-leadership. It's not fair to say that a persons race determines what they will think or how they will act.

It's like saying "white people think this" or for that manner "black people think this" it's called generalizing, and it's demeaning to everyone involved. For that matter generalizing about race is somthing typicly done by racial seperatists.

It is also self destructive as all hell to assert that the movement does not, or is incapable of respecting leadership by people of color. The panthers had a massive amount of respect and support by white activists.
Most white activists are more familiar with the ideas of Martin Luther King, Malcolm X, Rosa Parks, Sojourner Truth, and Fredrick Douglas than they are with the ideas of the ideas of TRE ARROW, the weathermen, sds, people like Eugine Debs, or William Morris.

Do you want the racism of specific leaders within the peace issue to be addressed and fought? Do you want a common struggle, that respects the leadership of everyone that acts for justice? Or you want a struggle dominated by exclusive racial factions?

Rosa Parks was frustrated beyond measure that people tokenized her as a pacifist. She stated that she would defend herself and her family with arms.
Everyone is not always responsible for how they are portrayed or used.

This article made a lot of accusations, and asked more questions than it answered.

Is your name Kil Ja Kim ?

Did you write this ?

"And even with all of the politicking that I did in Asian American and POC spaces, I didn't develop much of a vocabulary for describing and identifying anti-Black racism in society, let alone in our own work and as part of our identities.  Some Black intellectuals I know that helped me to understand that a person can have an analysis of white supremacy but not of anti-Blackness and that a person can profess a critique of whiteness and white people and still be anti- Black.  And me, I was proof.  I was very critical of white supremacy at the same time espousing Asian American and POC rhetoric at every opportunity, but especially when Black people were present. "

 http://www.aamovement.net/race_identity/antiblack.html

Sorry, but what a load of racist bullshit. I guess white folks should just shut up and stay home, or better yet kill themselves, because even just breathing is a racist act when a white person does it. In case anyone couldn't tell, that last bit was sarcasm.

I'd absolutely fucking hate a white person if they wrote that kind of garbage, and think that they were a racist fuckhead. I don't see why I shouldn't feel the same way about anyone else writing the same racist garbage. And whoever said that white people care more when white people are killed is full of it as well. Fact is, the military has a higher percentage of people of non-Euro background than the general population, and that changes nothing for members of the peace movement, white or otherwise.

I agree 100% with this article. I have said over and over if Cindy Sheehan was not white and middle class her ass would have been long ago locked down in jail. I have also said that her loss is only one white middle class INVADER coming home dead...would she have remained silent if only Iraqis had died, not her one white kid who was the illegal invader? For every one white American kid dead, there are thousands of people of color dead and no one is airing those mothers' grief or funding them camping out anywhere as protest. What Cindy has done is solidify the scared leftists who want to keep all their American privilege, such as SUV's, private home ownership, etc, while pretending they are VICTIMS of this war when they send their kids off to war and they come back dead. It is ridiculous. I saw Cindy saying she was "pleased with the progress we are making in stopping this war." WHAT PROGESS? What is she talking about? She may be happy with her new found paid career, but there is no progress in stopping this war that I can attest to. And the touchy feely bullshit Cindy spews is not upping the anti at all.

Again, I implore us all to hold the SOLDIERS THEMSELVES and THEIR FAMILIES accountable for ALL of their MOVEMENTS IN IRAQ. GWBush did not kill Cindy Sheehan's son. That is for sure. It was Casey Sheehan's stupidity, arrogance, that killed him. He was not poor, he did not join out of poverty. I can only attribute his joining to racism and ignorance, if anything. And again, we heard nothing from Sheehan while her kid was the KILLER, she only spoke out when her KILLER WAS KILLED! She had no problem with him blowing Iraqi mothers to pieces, not like the problem she has with her invader son being dead, and still, it is her son she laments most often, not those he killed via his job.

When I took this stand, and I have taken this stand against war and the soldiers who facilitate it for over 3 decades now, and I have a draft aged son who is NOT fighting in this war AS LONG AS I HAVE THE LIFE BLOOD TO STOP HIM from such a foolish mistake...when I take this stand, I get called a "commie whore," I get email saying i Have never had an orgasm(!), I am told to take psych drugs, I am told I am a traitor to the antiwar movement, I am called name after name after name...and yet, the essence of what I am saying is rarely intellectually challenged at all...The author of this post will suffer the same name calling playground. But I gotta say, if Cindy is pleased now with the progress she is having stopping the war, then she is easily placated. I AM NOT pleased with the NONPROGRESS we have had in stopping this war, and I honestly now feel that the LEFT is causing this war to go on more than the right due to their stupid nonthreatening middle class "protests" that do nothing. It is the LEFT who is blocking so much in the protest movement. At this point, I see the middle class white left as as much of a problem as the class insulated oblivious right wing. Those two look awfully similar in my book. Again, I reassert, if Cindy was poor or a person of color, her ass would have been locked down in jail long ago. It is her nonthreatening stance, and her lack of push, that allows her to walk free. If she was acting like someone like Fannie Lou Hamer outside of Bush's places, she would have been locked up for sure. It is her middle class whiteness that allows her freedom to return to "Camp Casey" again and again. And her middle class whiteness that has people literally handing her food, money, jobs, etc...while people from Katrina still have no jobs or homes. It does not take a genius to see the living examples of racism in America all around us...

sad that in the midst of so much opportunity for doing good in the world, people are constantly wasting their energy in attacking others who are trying to do good. If you are one of those who waste their time in this way, who are you really helping? the good guys or the bad guys?

progress versus reaction

First off, I'm not sure why Kirsten, you would support this woman who would deny your views because you are white. You can't speak to racism like she can. ;) I have to admire both of you for your sustained, hard core, but narrow minded, activism. First off, Tamara is making borad assumptions that don't hold true in the diverse world in which we live. Does racism exist - of course it does. Do minorities own it - yes. Can whites participate - why the hell not? In case you haven't heard, the races are mixed (another topic of Tamara's for another time). In case you haven't realized, calling Cindy a white middle class so and so also doesn't ring true. So what are you creds? Tamara is in academia and at least middle class. She is also contributing to class warfare with her rants. Would a black person get the same attention as Cindy? Well, possibly not, but that really depends upon the strategy. Wouild they get arrested and become invisible, possibly so, but again, depends on lots of things, such as the individual. Tamara is a racist in how she portrays blacks, as if they were incapable of fighting and become seen, despite the odds. Cindy was defamed by everyone save for her supporters. Would she seen with a different mind's eye if she were black - most definitely, so on that point you are both correct. However, that does not give you the authority to dismiss non minorities when they opt to participate as activists. So, whites can only be tree huggers? Why isn't Tamara getting on black males for joining the miltary? So, does this also mean that Condoleeza Rice has more credibility than us low lifes on IMC? Really, you need to get out more often. The world is not as black and white as you suspect. Poor whites are in the same fucking sinking boat and we care about Cindy's son no more than any other. I was in "nam in the most diverse unit there (Blacks, Indians, Puerto Ricans) and everyone's death was equal -period! In any case, carry on. My intent is not to stifle your vision, but to possibly think a bit outside your notions.

Let's hear it for division and creating conflict out of nothing.

I'm white and many years ago I spent 4 years in the US Marine Corps; I joined the USMC because I believed I was doing the right thing. I now know what imperialism is, back then I didn't. I came from a farming community, not much education, I was 18 at the time. I could've been sent to Nam but wasn't, and so here I am, still very much alive. But it could've just as easily been sent to Nam and died there. It could've happened, and then, who would've spoken for me? Cindy Sheehan and other antiwar people. So whenever I think of what could've happened to me back in the USMC, I feel very grateful to Cindy and everyone else in antiwar movements, past and present, black, white, Asian, Native American, etc.

People did call kirsten those things. The people that are doing this are fucking pigs. The leadership of the peace movement is racist for acting like white bread soccer moms are more relevant than dead iraqi kids.

Cindy sheenan is bieng tokenized the same as Rosa Parks was. Rosa Parks was moral enough to speak out against it. Cindy apperently isn't. I could give a fuck less what white activists are "supposed" to think. Kirsten and Tamara K. Nopper are bieng personally slandered for saying things that are mostly true, but hard to deal with. I'm sorry these people are attacking you both.
I just wish you didn't act like these people spoke for all white people.

Bieng white isn't the problem.

Bieng racist is.

Overall, this thread is saddening. I do not understand why so often I hear such anger expressed towards those who are trying to do good but maybe don't measure up in some way, real or perceived. From the words and tone of Tamara and Kirsten's postings, Cindy Sheehan should be stoned to death for her heinous crimes.

You know how such ranting makes me feel? It makes me feel like defending Cindy Sheehan. It makes me feel repulsed by the posters who write with such cruel anger. It makes me turn away from what they have to say because nothing written with such ugliness will create something beautiful in the world. I want nothing to do with such people. The ones who will redeem the dire situation we are in, are those who create, not those who seek to destroy.

Hey...why so much defensiveness?

This sounds like a bunch of un-concious men who immediately jump to the defense when we talk about sexism. There can be NO MAJOR CHANGE UNTIL WE DEAL WITH OUR OWN ISMS!!!!! Isn't that obvious? Yes, it's uncomfortable and painful but it's a part of life in this country, for some of us every
fuckin' day. If you don't have to deal with it every day, or ever, thank the maker that you were protected this time around and liste to our stories. Indy is a great forum to learn from other people what their lives are like, what their views are and to stretch your own mind. Too bad that some troglidites don't know how to listen, observe and think.

The only one talking about hate here are the ones you're defending. I won't defend such holier than thou attitude. I didn't support it in the 60's and I won't tolerate it today. What do you know about anyone here anyway? Nothing pretty much sums it up. So now Cindy is supposed to somehow take what she's trying to accomplish, and put it aside to discuss how she's being tokenized. Give me a fucking break. She lost her fucking son. Do you have children? If I lost my daughter in Iraq, I'd be in a state of rage for I don't know how long and I wouldn't fucking care about how Kristen or Tamara thought about how I channelled that rage. The fact that Cindy was able to manage even coming up with a plan is amazing. This is truly shameful! Why don't you all eat your young.

That's why I didn't go for all that zionazi hype. Sure most of it was just emotional based hysteria reacting to Israel's persecution of Palestinians, but it made us look like hate-mongers and It did a tremendous amount of damage to this movement. Calling people who suffered through the holocaust Nazis is terribly offensive. Its intended target extreme ethnocentric Jews, are usually borderline clinical paranoids and this sort rhetoric only enforces their persecution complex. While "anti-semitism" is a minor problem grossly overblown both in this movement and the "society" at large, Racism is a massive, deep-rooted, ever present tragedy. Katrina's death toll is near 1400, compare that with the combat death in Iraq, now at 1698  http://antiwar.com/casualties/ Why don't we care? You know—because we are racist. We've learned a neat trick though, every time a Black points out the ubiquitous racism that they have to constantly contend with both externally and internally we call them raciest... or playing the race card. Notice how many black leaders have been accused of racism, Jesse Jackson, Minister Farrakhan, Al Sharpton etc ... It's outrageous, it's despicable! We shouldn't allow Whites to get away with it. Blacks are not racist, they are racism worst victim. There isn't a White person in the world that would want to have to go through what they have to.... There is no running or hiding from it, can't pass for something else.

"I have said over and over if Cindy Sheehan was not white and middle class her ass would have been long ago locked down in jail" There's a lot of truth to this. But that's not Cindy's fault, she stood up regardless and helped reignite the anti-war movement that had been sabotaged and stifled by liberals...that's who we should be going after.

You can get in Cindy's face with your issues. Here's a website where you can send her an e-mail.

 http://www.meetwithcindy.org/

If you're this pissed off , why not confront her and at least give her a chance to respond ?

When asked, "do you have children?" The answer is "Yes, I have a DRAFT AGE MALE CHILD." As the mother of a child who has the potential of being drafted in this endless war, I have a right to say something. And unlike Sheehan, I do not need my son to kill others and then show up home dead to GET IT! I am talking BEFORE my son murders and then is murdered for his murdering. And I am also saying, my kid WILL NOT murder innocent people as his career. Period. Not now, not later. No matter how poor we are. I say that as a TRUE anti-war activist who LIVES what I say. As an anti-war activist who raised a son who GETS IT. I have to question Cindy Sheehan's middle class suburban anti-war activism prior to her personal loss, as her son did join the military of his own volition and not coming out of poverty either and Cindy has said publicly, repeatedly, that she "respected his free choice to join the military." When I talk about this to my 21 year old son, he says that he would prefer homelessness (and he knows what that is first hand) to the military, if it just about income. We are poor, but murdering other poor people for money is not an option, due to logic. He understands that all U.S. military in Iraq are illegal occupiers and invaders and he understands that there can be no legitimate tears over illegal murderers coming home dead. When I told my son I would literally break his legs if he tried to join the military and go to Iraq to murder, his response was, "I should hope so, if I do something that stupid!" I kind of feel that the first line of defense of anti-war activists is their own immediate family. Something went wrong at home if Sheehan was supposedly an antiwar activist yet she supplied the U.S. military with a murderer for their troops. Something broke down in her education of her son regarding war, and that is obvious. My take is the middle class suburban soccer mom type of antiwar protester does not take this stuff seriously until it affects them personally and that is gross, in my opinion. So call me names...but I still think there is room for a mightly discussion based on Cindy Sheehan's actions. The question remains, would we have heard from her at all if her son had remained the murderer instead of the one killed? That is a very legitimate and important question, as its answer has implications for all mothers and sons in the service right now. Are we going to let the mothers of these soldiers feign victimhood for their murderous son's behaviors? Again, Sheehan's kid joined not out of poverty, so what WAS his excuse? And how did she justify her support therein only to later revoke that support posthumously? And is that heroic or noble?

I find it ironic that the same people who are angry at a small handful of us questioning "Mother Sheehan's" sanctity and message, are ATTACKED with the FULL verocity, if not MORE hatred, than Tamara or I ever spewed toward Cindy Sheehan. I have said repeatedly this is not about me or Cindy Sheehan. It is about war and death. It is about the antiwar movement and their messages. I do not GET CIndy Sheehan's message if it is not that ONE WHITE MIDDLE CLASS DEAD U.S. SOLDIER trumps the thousands of dead poor Iraqis her paid murderer son helped facilitate the killing of. We cannot wait for each mother to have her kid come home in a body bag for them to wake up, as Sheehan did. And no, Casey Sheehan was no saint: he remains a paid murderer who illegally occupied another country and got a taste of his own medicine.

For those of you that spew slander and intense hatred at those who question Sheehan, and then you call us the "haters," you may want to look at your hypocrisy! We are attacked far worse for saying ANYTHING that dares question Sheehan, for merely asking serious and logical questions. That is very telling as to where this "peace" movement is heading. As I have said, it may be that the Left is as problematic, if not more so, than the Right, when it comes to stopping this war. I never said Sheehan had never orgasmed, that she needs psych meds, that she is a "commie whore"...but those things have been said about me for questioning Sheehan, and people need to look at that and what it means...I have been called way worse things for questioning Sheehan than I ever said about Sheehan! So what is that all about?

for keeping your son out of this war, and I have not expressed hatred towards you, just spirited disagreement that you and Tamara seem to classify anyone who doesn't live up to your standard as unacceptable. There are many reasons people neter the military, very few of which involve a conscious decision to kill. Additionally, many parents have little control over what their children do with their lives. No one is 'sainting' Cindy, just appreciating the action. Why is race even brought into this issue? We all know there may be different consequences if Cindy was black. Why should that fact be used to discredit Cindy is all I'm saying. There's a lot of trolling here calling people racists from people who don't know much about anyone here. Believe me, I've had it with the entrenched nature of racism in this country as I see it every day and from supposed liberals, so please don't give me the speech. I also live what I preach every day. In any case, I hope this discussion proceeds in a more civil manner towards everyone.

Ever listen to Louis Farakhan or Meir Kahane?

Hey...why so much defensiveness?



If you attack me, I will defend. If you want to write about your life, I am interested to read it, but I am not interested to be a punching bag for your own misplaced anger. Cindy Sheehan does not deserve to be crucified because there is racism and economic oppression in the world.

Some people are so bitter that they will attack any ray of hope in the world as not good enough because it hasn't fixed their own problems. Our human society sucks. Kirsten Anderberg is not reporting news, she is using this forum as her own personal therapy. Dumping some anger on others may feel good for the moment, but it is not a positive solution, it is abusive.

But of course it follows that the many alert, intelligent readers on this site are all in denial, are all racist and resistant to the truth. It could never be the poster, who maybe has something to learn.

You can find something bad or wrong with just about anybody if you look hard enough. You can build a case, but what can you possibly win?

This isn't exisestential. If you allow yourself to be used in a manner that is wrong you are aparty to that wrong doing.

Are you saying it isn't racist to claim that cindy's son is more relevant than thousand of dead iraqi's?

What is so vaugue about that?

It wasn't but months ago that her supporters were complaining because news of katrina was "threating" to push Cindy off the front page. Is this where you're heart is? NOT MINE!

If she's troubled by the way she's been aggrandized then she should say so, and move the movement somewhere other than the racist, priveledged direction it's going. Why? Because power brings responsability. Cindy has power, thus responsability, to stand up to the leaders in the movement around her. Just like we have a responsability to not blindly accept the direction we're bieng herded.

Please quit trying to insinuate I have not contacted Cindy for an interview. I have. I wrote her publicist, since that is the level she works on now (LOL) and they seem to be afraid to talk to anyone who is not part of the soccer mom protesters...I am ready to talk to and interview Cindy the minute she quits being a coward and lets someone ask the real questions of her. It is not me that is afraid of her, but rather the opposite. When Cindy Sheehan is ready to be interviewed by the anarchist media, I am here ready, willing, and able. Perhaps you should be emailing her with MY address since it is her who is too busy to answer our legitimate questions. My email is  kirstena@resist.ca. I will try the new link here to try to reach her, but it has been hard to penetrate her cronies or her to get these questions of her answered. I cannot support her until she answers these hard questions from another mother of a son her kid's age.

Who has claimed that Cindy's son is more relevant than thousands of dead Iraqis? We have no business in Iraq - period. Put Bush and his cronies on trial. The only power Cindy has is temporary press. Also, who complained that Katrina deleted Cindy's attention? This all seems to be nonsense. In any case Kirsten, I hope you and Cindy can chat. Maybe she feels intimidated by being attacked from the left as if she needs to defend herself. In my opinion, her tactic, if you want to call it that, to focus on American soldiers would be far more "acceptable" and far reaching in impact than if she spilled out comments about killing innocent Iraqis and calling the war for what it is - murder. So it's a matter of choosing your battles. Anarchists like you just tell it like it is and get the attention of a few people. You are not exactly a household name, with all due respect. Cindy's message, though diluted, and unacceptable to you, made change happen in the collective sub-conscious, so in effect, she is more effective and what's so horrible about that. Change occurs in increments (I know you may disagree with that long drawn out and, in the long term, questionable means), even if it may be too slow for you. I say, it's all good, so good luck to you. Everyone works in their own way. I change one person at a time, but I am also bold (talk to activists, rednecks, anyone, hung out with Black Panthers et al...) and, at the same time have a good sense of humor and really do love you all.

This is from Cindy Sheehan's recent book, Not One More Mother's Child:

"Bush put our kids in another person's country, and Casey was killed by insurgents. He wasn't killed by terrorists. He was killed by Shiite militia who wanted him out of the country, after Casey had been told he would be welcomed with chocolate and flowers as a liberator. The Iraqi people saw it differently. They saw him as an occupier."

Let me know if you can read disrespect for the Iraqi people anyplace in her book, which I have not yet read. I will post those quotes as fast as you dig them up. Let me know where she says that U.S. children are more valuable than Iraqi children. Let me know if you can read a defense of her son's actions in those sentences.
I think I have criticized the alleged 'leadership' of the anti-war movement in the U.S. as much as anyone, particularly for their pandering to white, middle-class forces. But Nopper's and Anderberg's attacks on Sheehan just don't hold up.

Now, for those who actually like Anderberg's efforts, here is an unedited quote from a year ago, which you can look up yourself on this site. I am certain that Cindy Sheehan has many flaws, but my gosh, if you were her, would you want to subject yourself to an interview with someone who 'writes' stuff like the lines below?

"I have given up on PDX IMC as a publishing venue for myself. It is stupid and a waste of my time. If and when anyone wants to actually **address** this very real issue with action as opposed to longwinded words, I am willing to discuss that. But I am not willing to play by these rules any longer. Why should I? These are my articles full of my own tears and sweat. Many of these articles are autobiographies of a woman, and many are very personal. I consider my articles pieces of artwork. I consider each on eo fthem a part of me. I should be allowed *some* dignity being an author. I am not just a poster who throws shit onto the site. I usually invest MANY hours into EACH article, getting names and websites right, getting proper dates and facts, editing, rewriting, organizing...part of what makes my articles stand out is I *do* take the time for those things. I invest at a level MOST IMC writers DO NOT from organization of thoughts in my articles, to making sure to provide current and accurate links to follow up on. Additionally, I pump out MORE articles at this high level than most writers too. You normally would not expect an artist to put up an art piece in an exhibit and then to give the patrons crayons and markers and scissors to defile it right there in front of the artist...covering your art with their scribbles."

What is your point? I hated trolls and have my own herd of them focused on me as well. I still hate trolls, but finally got to a point now where I do not give a crap what they do any more. I gave a shit before. Or maybe I just heard the trolls bullshit so often it became funny and more predictable, just like a broken record. But as an outspoken feminist journalist, I have had more than normal posters have in the way of intense trolling here. But I am not sure what on earth that old post has to do with this thread! You could pull up way more damning comments than that from me on this IMC! LOL! I am not perfect, nor have I ever claimed to be. Asking questions of public figures does not 1) make me a bad person, nor does it 2) mean I am perfect, nor does it 3) mean I am "attacking" the celebrity I am raising questions about! Journalists, additionally, are allowed to ask questions without being called "whores" etc. unless they are on an SNL skit! But I have been called a whore more than once on the PDX IMC by trolls and have been called that for questioning how the Sheehan Philosophy works. It has some serious logical flaws.

What kind of idiots believed Iraq would meet the invaders with open arms and chocolate?! Did Cindy believe what she says her kid did?! That is how she is presenting this in that quote...like GWBush told HER and Casey that Iraqis would receive them with praise and gifts, so they went for the war, and then now, that Casey is dead, they figured out GWBush lied?! It is weird. My son understands that you do not even get proper armor in the military on the front lines and that military families are on food stamps and vets benefits are atrocious and cut yearly...he knows you cannot trust the government as do I, which is why Bush telling either of us that Iraqis would be receiving us wioth praise there woudl be laughable to either of us...so I guess what she is saying is she was duped by her white middle class insulation and believed GWBush? And now is sad? I am just stunned anyone calling themselves an antiwar activist could say they just believed Bush and went to war...you have to think more than that...I mean, we do have the not so distant past of Vietnam, and these issues were well discussed then and both CIndy and I lived through that time. I just do not get the whole I Was Oblivious SO Went TO War alibi...I believed GWBush so I am unaccountable for blindly following him...YICKS!

I agree with most of what I read on your site and I like you POV.
Try not to be so thin-skinned. Too many intelligent, insightful people get scared off the IMC, that's why I prefer people stay anonymous, only their virtual ego gets bruised. Instead of getting all riled up and offended or even worse discouraged, have fun with it like I do. The IMC is no more stupid, ignorant or vulgar than the society as a whole. In fact it's pretty indicative, try reading your typical college student's papers. I have Friend who is a professor (well almost, assistant professor) When we go out drinking he brings them along for entertainment---Unbelievable stuff and this is a very good school! What can you do? Keep chipping away at the ignorance and remember it wasn't too long ago that getting the truth out was practically impossible. I believe that speaking the truth no Madder how quietly has an impact.

You're wrong on the Cindy thing. It senseless and a waste of energy... And a little insensitive to say the least, to claim she didn't do enough to stop her son from joining. I think you know how messy these things can be and children have minds of their own. You should direct that fire at those who have clear come up short...like UFPJ.

I'm not insinuating anything. I remember that you mentioned on a previous post that you had tried to contact her publicist. I came across this link and it looked like it might be a way to get through. Thanks for trying.

In the meantime would you mind posting your questions here ? And also the letter you sent to her publicist. What I'm wondering is if you hit these guys with a bunch of attitude and hostility right up front and got nowhere. A lot of times the response you get from people depends on how you approach them.

Even though I don't agree with your rant, I'll give you credit for hangin' tuff. At least you're not one of these hit and run posters.

I've been reading Tamara Nopper's essays since 2003, when her essay "The White Anti-Racist is an Oxymoron". After resisting her ideas at first, I've come to the conclusion that we whites ignore her at our peril. The reason why we get so whiny and defensive when reading her is that she refuses to let us claim innocence while receiving the benefits of whiteness in a white-supremacist society. It violates our internalized assumptions of "color-blindness", meritocracy and individualism to acknowledge that everything about our lives, and everything about the lives of people of color, is as much structured by race as it is by class or gender. If we don't get harassed by the cops, if store clerks don't follow us around, if we have an easier time with realtors or at the bank, if our skin tone or nasal index or hair texture is aesthetically normative, while people of color experience the opposite reality, then we are reaping the rewards of a system that stigmatizes others. Accordingly, our claims of being "anti-racist" will ring hollow and self-serving as long as a neo-colonial distribution of power continues to privilege Europeans and Euro-Americans materially, culturally and psychologically over all others on a planetary scale. I'm not saying everything is clear cut, or that all "people of color" are oppressed to the same degree. Much like "Sub-Saharan Africa" (a racially coded term if ever there was one) is at the bottom of the global scale in terms of GDP, child mortality and HIV infection rates, while Japan is part of the "G-7" countries and is home to some of the largest multinationals, the rate of incarceration and poverty for African-Americans is far higher than that for, Japanese-Americans; the system of global apartheid has a few slots open near the top for "model minorities". But even so, Asian-Americans deal with all kinds of racist shit we whites don't, and their families' wealth or poverty is often indirectly affected by the colonization of their ancestors by the Spanish, Portuguese, French, British and (in a different sense) Americans. Tamara Nopper, by the way, has written that she was adopted and grew up in a white family, and who treated her like shit for being Korean. Have you ever met a white person who grew up in an analogous situation? I haven't. She has a right to be pissed off at whites in general on that count alone.
Now, my own belief is that the material privilege that underpins whiteness has to be destroyed in order for whiteness as an advantageous category, per se, to be destroyed; talk of "abolishing whiteness" directly is unlikely to gain political traction in white communities or in many communities of color. But we--and here I mean whites who oppose white supremacy--can organize against "whiteness" by refusing to let the likes of Cindy Sheehan and Michael Moore appeal to "American values" and talk about taking "our" country back. Claims of color-blindness aside, such claims are historically and implicity rooted in white nationalism. This country never belonged to African-American Katrina "refugees", let alone Sunni Muslim mother #_______- whose kid just got blown up by a cruise missile. We whites need to stop gesturing to the "mainstream" and let the voices of people of color be heard, and we need to stop paternalistically claiming other people's right to speak. Let's start questioning and subverting our racial privileges on the material and socio-cultural level instead of bragging about what admirable "anti-racists" we are and patting ourselves on the back while black males are still sitting on death row benches and countries are getting bombed.
Kirsten is right.

Also, Nopper never condemned John Brown. She wrote that had he had "fucked up ideas" about the "servile" character of slaves, and that she took the lesson from reading a biography about him that complacency in the face of racist violence won't cut it—action is necessary.

What the hell was that ranting and raving all about?

or at least parallel to each other.. if people of color are frustrated with white involvement in particular movements, they should start their own and exclude whites. I think this is the author's desired outcome, which to me sounds counter productive.

For me, I'm going to offer help to those who I feel most need it. If that means I'm helping in a movement that is trying to change something that mostly affects people of color, I'm going to try to support them. I have been at community meetings where I am the only white person in the room, and I find that for some people that creates tension. When they actually understand my intentions, they support me and bring me in as part of that community.

I'm not representing myself as the 'great white hope,' that some activists do (which would understandably upset many people). Rather, I bring myself as one person.. with hands and feet ready to help get things done. While you folks are busy critiquing the cultural competance of every movement, I'll be out there getting my hands dirty, avoiding the generalizations that come with the approach the author has taken here.

Although I agree with the point of views of Tamara Knopper and Kirsten Anderberg, I will not say that perhaps they were not slightly overcritical. I am sure that there are worst targets that they should have picked. Still, the Leftist movement in the U.S. is racist,sexist,etc. and tend to harbor the predjudice of the societies that they are in - just like the right. I think the Leftist movement is well meaning and has alot of good strengths, but those are the facts, whether some want to face them or not. I know that Cindy Sheehan is not to blame, but she is a clear example of the biases within and outside of the movement whether people like it or not. I do not think this takes away completely from her good deeds, but the issues that these two writers bring out need to be confronted if Leftists genuine want to tackle their biases and be genuine allies in the movement and toward minorities.

Some one wrote in criticism of the article(I am sorry to have forgotten the poster's name):

This also seems to suggest that minorities want similar attention and makes the false assumption that they oppose the war as much as Cindy.

For your first comment, minorities think that it is only fair that they should garner the same(not more nor less) amount of attention in something when they contribute just as much to or as affected by like anyone else, especially when the movement in question is said to be progressive/leftist. For the second comment about blacks not being in opposition to the war, I disagree with you but have to articles to explain why:

Are Black People Pulling their Own Weight in Opposing Bush's War On Iraq?
http:www.change-links.org/The Anti-War2.htm

Looking for Color in the Anti-War movement
 http://colours.mahost.org/articles/martinez3.html