'Liberal Infallibility' Excludes Soldiers Supporting the War
Thursday, February 8, 2007 at 12:34PM Ann Coulter refers to it as “ immuniz(ing) the message by choosing a messenger with a tragedy”. “Liberal Infallibility”, the doctrine in which the message can be wrong, the facts inaccurate and the victim immune from scrutiny, is an unwritten code that gives the anti-people (anti-war, anti-Bush, anti-Christian, anti-life) the backbone to most of their arguments.
When a soldier is killed in Iraq, the family receiving credibility is the family opposed to the war. Cindy Sheehan is a case and point. Try asking any anti-war activist about the a family who supports the war effort even after the death of their soldier and the question quickly turns to: “Have you lost anyone in Iraq?” (Of course then the question can be posed, “Have you?”, but that would be unseemly). If death were the litmus test for moral authority then no one could raise a question against invading Iraq solely on the basis of the humanitarian crisis under Saddam Hussein.
On the other hand, the family that still supports the mission and believes their soldier was not killed in vain is met with confused condolences; after all, foreign policy should be based on emotion and personal loss. It is even worse for the soldier who whole heartedly supports the mission in Iraq; as John Kerry suggested, they must be uneducated and dumb.
Last week in Bayji, Iraq, paratrooper SGT William Sigua, 21, died from gunshot wounds while on patrol. Bayji was an infantry squad leader with 1st Battalion, 505th Parachute Infantry Regiment, 82nd Airborne. Division. On Friday, Siqua's mother released this public statement:
William was a remarkable son and a dedicated soldier and paratrooper. He had very strong convictions toward his career as a soldier. He loved serving in the 82nd Airborne Division as a paratrooper, and he strongly believed in our country's mission in Iraq.
He was very excited and looking forward to this deployment to Iraq. He believed he and his unit would make a difference. There is no reason to think he wouldn't.
He had an impact on everyone he met and had many friends who looked up to him and will remember him as a hero. I am very proud of my son and his commitment to serve our country. We will miss him dearly.
Recently, William established a relationship with the fifth grade class at Santa Rita Elementary School in Los Altos. He and the children exchanged mail, and he enjoyed helping them understand more about what we are doing to preserve freedom. The children were excited by their contact with him.
That's the kind of effect he had on everyone.
-Mrs. Jackie Sigua, Sgt. William Sigua's mother
While anti-war activists promote their agenda by hiding behind the skirts of mothers and wives who've lost their men in combat, they have to ignore the wives and mothers who stand with their sons and husbands even in death. These are marginalized and virtually ignored, yet praise be upon those who hate the mission and have a dead soldier to prove it. If this doesn't add enough insult to injury, the anti-war crowd coronates soldiers who refuse to serve but chicken out when their ticket is drawn to serve in Iraq.
It isn't Cindy Sheehan who is the patriot, or Ehren K. Watada who refuses to serve in Iraq.... it is SGT William Siqua and his mother who get it and are standing by what they knew to be right. Mrs. Jackie Siqua's thoughtful and dignified public statement shows enormous class, grief not withstanding.
If losing a loved one in combat legitimizes a position either for or against the war in Iraq, surely those who still support the mission and respect President Bush despite the death of a family member deserve to be heard.
Hat Tip: Cop the Truth
Trackback URL:
http://amyproctor.squarespace.com/blog/trackback/905030
Ann Coulter, Iraq, Patriotism, Troops 
View Printer Friendly Version
Email Article to Friend
Reader Comments (15)
Yes, and the anti-war kooks will call those wives/mothers warmongerers who would rather sacrifice their loved ones than disagree with the President, right? Heaven forbid anyone stand by their convictions and the convictions of their soldiers.
"If death were the litmus test for moral authority then no one could raise a question against invading Iraq solely on the basis of the humanitarian crisis under Saddam Hussein.". . . . .
Isn't that what Sen. Barbera Boxer, a California cohort of "Too Much Botox" Pelosi, had in mind when she made her moronic statement to Secretary Rice?
It just dawned on me me: "If liberals had any brains at all, they would really be dangerous!"
Great post, Amy. Thanks for sharing the story of this wonderful young Paratrooper. May God see him safely home.
I served in Vietnam in 1969. Back then, we were betrayed by the left (democrats) in this country. They unleashed a wave of death in that region that is unparalelled. They are doing it again. God help us.
Cody, I was in Vietnam during the war, but not with the military. I was with a small group of Orthodox Catholic monks working with refugees and orphans, and I remember the liberal leftist crap that was going on back here, and it stunk to high heavens. Looking around at all the same old faces that are involved in the anti war demonstrations going on today (Dick Gregory, Jane "Hanoi" Fonda, John Kerry, etc) is Dejavu all over again. I saw the effects that the protests had on our soldiers who faced death every single day in the jungles of Vietnam.
Yes, they have free speech, but I think that those protests are disgraceful, disgusting and extremely harmful to the military. To the demonstrators I can only say: "May God have mercy on you", and to all those who served proudly, honorably and bravely in Vietnam and those in Iraq and Afghanastan: "God bless each and every one".
It is a wonder that the head of New York Times recently bemoaned that his paper might not be here in five-years. Dwindling sales and cancellation of subscriptions have dogged the paper for the last several years. It is not the internet that is the problem, but the paper caters to the extreme left, and the managers live in fantasy land that everyone in America is a radial lefty. People are sick of not getting both sides of the story from this paper, and that is why people have stopped buying it. Maybe if they run articles that cater to different views that paper may survive. But I highly doubt it.
You wouldn’t find this type of story telling in their paper.
Well, as always Amy, I write a piece that has infuriated me about how lost the media is, and you toss the slam dunk hoop! :)
I love it when I can come to your blog and feel, good. Thanks again! :)
And, Fr. Gregori, I come to the same conclusion as you when it comes to this band of lost souls. Twits! All of 'em!
Anne Coulter is not a Conservative. Far from it, actually. No husband, no children, she has sex outside of marriage, a friend of Liberal Bill Maher and one of her ex-boyfriends is the son of a porn peddler.
That doesn't mean that she's not conservative. Do you think that in order to be conservative you've got to be married and have children? And she can't be friends with a liberal? I'm a Christian, so does that mean that I can't be friends with those who are not and who lead their lives in opposition to my faith? As far as her once dating the son of a porn peddler (which I don't know if that's true or not, I don't really know much about Ann Coulter), since when should we condemn the children for the sins of their parents? I don't know what the guy is like. He could be in total opposition to what his dad does.
I'd like to know how ben knows anything about Ann Coulter's sex life. His assertion is contrary to what I understand.
One of her ex's is a son of a porn peddler? Wow! Talk about a stretch! There are plenty of people who disavow their parents' legacy... so what and how do you know? Even so, what does this have to do with Ann's brilliant description of liberal infallibility? I guess since you can't argue with that....
Ann isn't married, but how does anyone know about her sex life?
She does claim to be a Christian, though I'm not sure what her denominational affiliation is. I suspect she might be Catholic, based on some of the things she's said and written.
BTW, I'm single, with no kids other than two furry ones who walk on all fours, and I have friends who are liberal. And I'm about as conservative as one can get.
It truly saddens me how the left tend to ignore the mothers and wives who are in full support of the war and how proud they are of their loveds ones serving. They need to start looking at both sides, yeah! Like that's ever going to happen! God have mercy on this group. They should feel ashamed.
It does remind me of the 60's when this group of cowards spit on our brave and precious soldiers when they came home from a horrific war. Disgraceful doesn't even come close to describing their actions.
I understand parents mourning their children having come close to losing my own, I would not wish it on anyone.
My take is this lovely mother making a statement and respecting her sons choices and being willing to fight and stand up to declare he did not die in vain.
My question to the likes of Sheehan and company is this: How much respect are you showing for your son, by publicly denouncing the very thing he chose to died for?
Amy,
As you know, a group of us honor a fallen hero every Wednesday as "Wednesday Hero", and your post falls right in line. Thank you.
As far as Ben's comments, they are of topic and rediculous. Perhaps, If he'd quit using his parent's computer and read some history, he may learn something of value.
And to Cody, Thank you for your service. You too, Fix4.
Go Navy!