A name, whether of an organization, a website, or an individual poster can be very indicative or portray something untrue. It can purposely lead to false conclusions, such as the "Holy Land Foundation" or provide for the appearance of impartial position, such as the IAVA.
I first heard of the Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans Association in 2006. My first question was "Why?" Why is someone trying to form a specialized organization rather than simply joining the Veterans of Foreign War which is already established and already active, with greater membership, and more ability to do what needs to be done?
My second question was: "What is their mission/purpose?" How does this upstart organization differ
from those already established, other than in the specificity of their membership? The organization did not seem to have a clear mission. It did not clearly state its objectives or positions. It seemed to be just another group that decided that the means to the top was to create a new organization rather than join those already in the same space: The American Legion and The VFW.
The only thing that set them apart from the established organizations was their focus on the new generation of Veterans and specific interest in TBI/PTSD. Why should I join? No real reason to spend more of my money when I already belonged to the VFW.
It wasn't until 2008, during the election campaigns, that I saw their true purpose: A partisan grading of politicians designed to demonstrate one party was good and the other bad. The grading system was so skewed that it weighted one particular bill at some 30% of the overall grade with a bonus for anyone that "sponsored" it while grading against the competing bill that served a similiar purpose.
Anyone that knows me in the least knows my contempt for the IVAW. I recognize their right to free speech, but not their partisan purposeful misportrayal of the truth. I applaud "This Ain't Hell" for maintaining the factual record on the IVAW and its misportrayals. But in the scope of things, the IVAW is more forthright in their purpose than is the IAVA.
For the next year or so, the IAVA will return to its cover as a benevolent, non-partisan organization. It will run advertisements to pretend it cares about health issues. It will ask its members for money to fund its lobbying efforts. It will ask others to join it. And then in 2010, as it did in 2008, it will come out with a partisan grading system to demonstrate all of one party are good and all of the other are bad. It will use the marketing blurbs at the top of bills to demonstrate that the party cares, even though the legislation in the bill is the opposite.
And the IAVA has been joined by a new organization that was formed for partisan purposes, hi-jacked another good cause, and is now pulling the sheets over their true agenda to attract members. As potential members peruse the mission statements of these two organizations, they will be hard pressed to find the real agenda. Instead they will find vague and innocuous statements designed to mislead. And in 2010, these two organizations will proclaim themselves the voice of their membership, against one party, in a non-partisan fashion.
That new organization was formed in July 2008, with an express partisan purpose:
"In July of 2008, a group of Army and Marine Corps spouses formed Blue Star Families. While the organization originally began as a grassroots group of military families supporting Barack Obama for the presidency" BSF About Page, 3/20/2009
"Blue Star Families for Obama used the imagery of the blue star from The Blue Star Service Flag, which was designed in 1917 and is widely recognized as the symbol of a family who has a member in the military service. There are other organizations that claim “Blue Star” in their title. It is in no way affiliated with Blue Star Mothers of America."
In short, they hi-jacked the symbol and good will of families who sacrifice time and worry from their Troops, for expressly political purposes.
These purposeful misportrayals are much more dangerous than those that clearly state their dire purposes.
The American Legion, The Veterans of Foreign War, Blue Star Mothers are the actual non-partisan organizations. Be ware wolves in sheepdog clothing.
Vets For Freedom, Vets 4 Victory, and the IVAW are purpose based organizations that state the reason why their members come together. The agendas they pursue are clearly stated.
War on Terror News©2009, ARM, all rights reserved.
EDIT: This should not be taken as a position that families or troops cannot have political positions, form organizations that support those positions, or support a particular candidate. Rather it is a statement that when such organizations are formed, with leaderships that will do so, that they should be up front with their memberships that the organization has a partisan basis, rather than pretend otherwise.
Additionally, it is unethical for such an organization to take as symbols or names that which is used by a legitimate non-partisan, non-profit organization. The "Blue Star" should not politicized. It represents the families sacrificing time and emotion while their Troop is on the Battlefield, not the hidden political agenda of those preying upon those families dealing with daily worry.
Stumble It!
