Cindy Sheehan: What’s Worse? Trump’s Background Checks or Clinton’s Policy of Mass Murder?

Von Mnar Muhawesh, MintPress, August 9, 2016. The
anti-war activist whose son died in Iraq in 2004 joins Mnar Muhawesh on ‘Behind
the Headline’ to discuss the status of the anti-war movement today and what
voters who want an end to war should consider before heading to the ballot box.
MINNEAPOLIS — Foreign policy is a cornerstone
of every presidential campaign. More than foreign aid or identifying our
allies, though, a prospective president’s foreign policy can be examined
through a willingness or unwillingness to go to war.
And it’s up to the public to
decide: Do we want more war?

According to a CNN/ORC poll conducted in late April and early May, the country is evenly
split on one question in particular: “Do you favor or oppose the United States
sending ground troops into combat operations against ISIS forces in Iraq or
48 percent said they support
sending in ground troops to combat ISIS, but 48 said they are opposed.
Now, consider the candidates from
our two major parties: Donald Trump, the Republican nominee who has vowed to
send in ground troops to 
“knock the hell” out of ISIS, and Hillary
Clinton, the Democratic nominee whose own 
ties to ISIS were recently exposed by
WikiLeaks’ Julian Assange says
her emails indicate that 
she sold weapons to ISIS in Syria during her time as
secretary of state, and she’s also made money from her ties to companies
working for and funding ISIS. So, Clinton, it seems, may be able to have her
cake and eat it, too, by profiting from the very source of terrorism she both
helped to embolden and 
promised to defeat.
Trump has never held public
office, so he has no voting record to examine. What he does have is a
never-ending string of comments that reveal him as a 
xenophobic and a racist. However, he was not a fan of the Iraq War, even if only because it put
his own business interests in jeopardy.
Clinton, as a senator and
secretary of state, built a consistent, and horrifying, record of 
warmongering that helped create ISIS
and fuel the rise of terrorism across the Middle East and Africa. But it’s her
support and advocacy for the Iraq War — a war in which 
180,000 Iraqi civilians and 4,500 U.S. service personnel have been killed — that helped create her legacy as a warmonger.
One of those fallen U.S. soldiers
was Casey Sheehan, a U.S. Army specialist, who died on April 4, 2004.

Cindy Sheehan is taken into custody by a United States Park Police officer
during a demonstration in front of the White House in Washington, Monday, Oct.
5, 2009.
In the wake of his death, his
mother, Cindy Sheehan, became a vocal anti-war activist. In 2005, the “Peace
Mom” camped outside of President Bush’s ranch in Texas for several weeks,
vowing to stay there until she got a face-to-face meeting with the president,
who she said never had a good reason for going to war.
She’s been arrested during
multiple anti-war protests in the years since then, and she also produces a
blog and podcast, “Cindy Sheehan’s Soapbox,” which tackles the U.S. empire that
spreads war around the world.

She’s here on “Behind the
Headline” to talk to me about where the anti-war movement is today, and whether
any presidential candidate can bring with them any hope for a world without