More Soldiers Have Signed The Appeal For Courage Than The Appeal For Redress

UPDATE:

At the time of this article's writing the Appeal for Redress had 1744 signatures, and the Appeal for Courage had 1884. Those numbers have changed in one day.

The Appeal for Redress now stands at 1748 ... an addition of 4.

The Appeal for Courage now stands at 1910 ... an addition of 36.


I have mentioned this several times on my show, and have been proven right.

The Appeal for Redress is a legal petition for military personnel to sign in opposition of the war in Iraq.

It reads:

As a patriotic American proud to serve the nation in uniform, I respectfully urge my political leaders in Congress to support the prompt withdrawal of all American military forces and bases from Iraq . Staying in Iraq will not work and is not worth the price. It is time for U.S. troops to come home.

On February 25, 2007, CBS 60 Minutes did a whole segment on the Appeal for Redress. That may have been the big time in the way of publicity, but the Appeal for Redress has been the baby of the anti-war movement. Veterans for Peace, MarchOnPentagon.org, NY Times, Alternet.org, Noam Chomsky, LA Times, Truthout.org, Associated Press, Washington Post, the Nation and several other media outlets, congressmen, and anti-war fruits have been parading the Appeal for Redress as proof that the military doesn't support the war in Iraq.

I instantly began receiving emails from my anti-war listeners harping on my "lies", and "spin" about the support of the war effort among our troops. All of the letters and audio I provided as proof of our warrior's resolve were dismissed as a talk show host's tricks. After one of my shows I had a Richard Belzer esc moment.

One of my listeners wrote:

"Whether the troops support the mission is irrelevant. They are soldiers, they have given their lives to be ordered, it is up to us to see what laimbrains like you can't see."

This wasn't the first time this particular person had said such things on my program, but you know damn well that he was supportive of the Appeal for Redress. Without a doubt in my mind ... he doesn't believe the troops who signed the Appeal for Redress are irrelevant. He surely touts their support of his opinion, but condemns those who disagree.

My response to all of these people was one thing - do you think the Appeal for Courage will get the same media coverage as the Appeal for Redress? All but one had no idea what I was talking about.

While the Appeal for Redress still baths in mass amounts of media coverage as if it were holy water ... the Appeal for Courage has received little attention. Neil Cavuto on Fox has covered it, and Stars and Stripes has done stories on both appeals, but aside from that there has been no national coverage. To make things worse ... there has been little to no local coverage as well. We don't have to really ask why the Appeal for Courage is not getting the media frenzy that their opponent has received, but the outrage for this hypocrisy is justified.

The Appeal for Courage reads:

As an American currently serving my nation in uniform, I respectfully urge my political leaders in Congress to fully support our mission in Iraq and halt any calls for retreat. I also respectfully urge my political leaders to actively oppose media efforts which embolden my enemy while demoralizing American support at home. The War in Iraq is a necessary and just effort to bring freedom to the Middle East and protect America from further attack.

You'll notice the Appeal for Courage addresses this media bias directly. Truer words have never been stated, but those very same words have condemned the Appeal for Courage to isolation. The media will be damned if they will allow even more troops to expose their agenda, and embarrass them. Do you remember Capt. Sherman Powell? He owned Matt Lauer on the media's disgraceful coverage of the war. Rather than risk a similar situation there seems to be a media blackout of the Appeal for Courage.

Guess what? It isn't working.

In spite of the overwhelming conspiracy to not allow troops in support of the war to be heard ... the Appeal for Courage has more, yes more, signatures than the Appeal for Redress.

This stunning, yet not surprising, state of affairs is sure to further prove the shriveling significance of the main stream media. In a gritty grassroots campaign, led by the likes of Michelle Malkin and others, bloggers worked hard to get the word out to our troops that they can express their support for the mission. As American warriors always do ... they showed up for the fight with their heads held high, and they are winning.

According to the Appeal for Redress website ... they have 1744 signatures.

According to the Appeal for Courage website ... they have 1884 signatures.

The Appeal for Redress was established in October 2006. While the appeal for Courage was established in February 2007. Even though the Appeal for Courage is several months younger than the Appeal for Redress they have more signatures, and have much more momentum. MoveOn.org is directly tied to the Appeal for Redress, but has not been able to throw enough money at it to make it more successful than their rival.

I encourage you to visit the media section of both websites to see the disparity between the coverage of the two appeals. It is truly telling to see the great disadvantage the Appeal for Courage has faced.

The Appeal for Courage is going up against the behemoths of MoveOn.org and the main stream media. Yet they have managed to succeed with the same tenacity and determination of the warriors they represent.