Barbara Boxer Approved Code Pink Trip to Fallujah to Donate $600,000 to Extremists

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

So would aiding and abetting terrorists to kill US soldiers qualify as behavior unbefitting of a sitting US senator?

On October 12, Scott Swett at the American Thinker reported that Senator Barabara Boxer (D-CA) along with Representatives Raul Grijalva (D-AZ), Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) and Henry Waxman (D-CA) secured diplomatic courtesy letters that allowed anti-American Code Pink activists to travel to Fallujah, Iraq. The radicals traveled to Fallujah in late 2004 to donate $600,000 worth of humanitarian aid to the people who had just killed 51 Americans and wounded 560 more earlier that month. Operation Phantom Fury in Fallujah was the heaviest US urban combat since the Vietnam War.

After the report was published at American Thinker the article was deleted at Islam Online.

But, thanks to the internet archive a copy of the article is still available:

This must have made Barbara Boxer very happy.

Unfortunately, our corrupt media will continue to hide this horrible event from the American people.

http://biggovernment.com/jhoft/2010/10/13/barbara-boxer-approved-code-pink-trip-to-fallujah-to-donate-600000-to-extremists/

[Ban Hammer 13,514]

code pink? no surprise there.

[JohnSmith2007 353]

Hmm... It must be October. What a surprise!

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Barbara boxer act like a ######? No. Not her. Not ever.

[luckytxn 2,265]

It would definitely help the Socialists to keep the insurgency going back then to fan the Anti war flames.

[ready4ONE 5,400]

These folks lost loved ones in a war they believe illegal. Or do you good RWN's feel good Americans can only believe and think as you do?

The article names four Congresspersons, then the next paragraph states two, but not which two, were instrumental in making the visit possible.

The mind boggles at the hypocrisy of the responses thus far to this thread. Proud supporters of the Constitution who brook no dissent from your own RWN views.

[Ban Hammer 13,514]

These folks lost loved ones in a war they believe illegal. Or do you good RWN's feel good Americans can only believe and think as you do?

The article names four Congresspersons, then the next paragraph states two, but not which two, were instrumental in making the visit possible.

The mind boggles at the hypocrisy of the responses thus far to this thread. Proud supporters of the Constitution who brook no dissent from your own RWN views.

you know for a fact the code pink members that went have lost someone in the war?

[Obama 2012 1,714]

These folks lost loved ones in a war they believe illegal. Or do you good RWN's feel good Americans can only believe and think as you do?

The article names four Congresspersons, then the next paragraph states two, but not which two, were instrumental in making the visit possible.

The mind boggles at the hypocrisy of the responses thus far to this thread. Proud supporters of the Constitution who brook no dissent from your own RWN views.

Code Pink is an abomination for one. They don't just protest war, they protest against soldiers a lot of times period.

Either way, the fact that a politician would do something like this is almost treasonous as well. Barbara Boxer is one of the scum of the scum.

If you believe the war is illegal, that's fine and dandy. If you want to protest it, that's fine and dandy. The moment you try and help those who were fighting against in any way though, that should spell your automatic death sentence. Especially if you are a political figure.

[The_Dude 1,142]

Code Pink is an abomination for one. They don't just protest war, they protest against soldiers a lot of times period.

Either way, the fact that a politician would do something like this is almost treasonous as well. Barbara Boxer is one of the scum of the scum.

If you believe the war is illegal, that's fine and dandy. If you want to protest it, that's fine and dandy. The moment you try and help those who were fighting against in any way though, that should spell your automatic death sentence. Especially if you are a political figure.

Jesus Paul, you're being a melodramatic 12 year old little girl about this......... It's humanitarian aid that they are providing to the people of the area. They aren't going there to provide material aid to the insurgents, they aren't helping al-Qaida. Treasonous to protest the war? Come on Paul, put on your big boy pants and lets stop the juvenile level rants.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Jesus Paul, you're being a melodramatic 12 year old little girl about this......... It's humanitarian aid that they are providing to the people of the area. They aren't going there to provide material aid to the insurgents, they aren't helping al-Qaida. Treasonous to protest the war? Come on Paul, put on your big boy pants and lets stop the juvenile level rants.

Can you post a response without namecalling or trolling?

There is no such thing as humanitarian aid during a war. The ignorance of those today is in thinking that innocents shouldn't have to suffer. For a war to be successful however, the innocent must suffer. The innocent must die. That's what war is. If it were just military forces going against each other, then it's just a game.

[The_Dude 1,142]

Can you post a response without namecalling or trolling?

There is no such thing as humanitarian aid during a war. The ignorance of those today is in thinking that innocents shouldn't have to suffer. For a war to be successful however, the innocent must suffer. The innocent must die. That's what war is. If it were just military forces going against each other, then it's just a game.

Can you post without being a hysterical partisan hack?

Paul, you are either ignorant of the truth, either willfully or not, but there is humanitarian aid druing times of war. Innocents should have to suffer? Wow, you're not only delusional but depraved as well. Thanks for defining what the goal and components of war is, but I'll take the definition of someone who knows what they are talking about though.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Can you post without being a hysterical partisan hack?

Paul, you are either ignorant of the truth, either willfully or not, but there is humanitarian aid druing times of war. Innocents should have to suffer? Wow, you're not only delusional but depraved as well. Thanks for defining what the goal and components of war is, but I'll take the definition of someone who knows what they are talking about though.

You are ignorant of what war is if you think that the goal of war is to limit innocent casualties. When you're trying to break a 'people' or change the flow of things, you recruit the innocents who are willing to betray their nation and you kill the rest. If they aren't with you, they are against you. They are your enemy. If you're not willing to kill innocent people, you need not go to war. It's really that simple. We could have been out of Iraq and Afghanistan years ago, but the way we fight wars today is weak. The kids the insurgents keep recruiting should have been put down long ago.

I'm not saying that I agree with the war over there at all. All I'm saying is that if you're going to go to war, then be prepared to go to war.

[The_Dude 1,142]

You are ignorant of what war is if you think that the goal of war is to limit innocent casualties. When you're trying to break a 'people' or change the flow of things, you recruit the innocents who are willing to betray their nation and you kill the rest. If they aren't with you, they are against you. They are your enemy. If you're not willing to kill innocent people, you need not go to war. It's really that simple. We could have been out of Iraq and Afghanistan years ago, but the way we fight wars today is weak. The kids the insurgents keep recruiting should have been put down long ago.

I'm not saying that I agree with the war over there at all. All I'm saying is that if you're going to go to war, then be prepared to go to war.

Paul, just because you think something is so, doesn't mean that it is. You are just wrong here. There is humanitarian aid during wars, despite your ignorance. You should check out the geneva convention, there are protected parties and there are restrictions on who you can and cannot target. If it happens as a bi-product of war, then I suppose that is an accident. But you cannot, as you suggest target civilians in war. Furthermore, the 4th geneva convention outlines what humanitarian support that you can and cannot provide during times of war.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Paul, just because you think something is so, doesn't mean that it is. You are just wrong here. There is humanitarian aid during wars, despite your ignorance. You should check out the geneva convention, there are protected parties and there are restrictions on who you can and cannot target. If it happens as a bi-product of war, then I suppose that is an accident. But you cannot, as you suggest target civilians in war. Furthermore, the 4th geneva convention outlines what humanitarian support that you can and cannot provide during times of war.

Wow, you really understand nothing of war.

It's WAR my friend. There are no rules. The mistake we make is when rules are put forth by others.

If you want to win, if you want to change things, you blow the living hell out of whomever if you want to see things your way.

My goodness. The Geneva convention? Really? I hope you're not serious.

[The_Dude 1,142]

Wow, you really understand nothing of war.

It's WAR my friend. There are no rules. The mistake we make is when rules are put forth by others.

If you want to win, if you want to change things, you blow the living hell out of whomever if you want to see things your way.

My goodness. The Geneva convention? Really? I hope you're not serious.

Wow Paul, I guess you really are that ignorant. Sad really.