SubscribeCO Parents Fight Statue Of Afghan War Hero
From an irate Denver Post:
Parents protest military statue
Parents oppose image, location of memorial
By Joey Bunch and Carlos Illescas
04/05/2007
A group of Littleton parents is opposing the design and location of a memorial to a fallen local Navy SEAL, Danny Dietz, who died in combat in Afghanistan two years ago.
They say the statue, depicting Dietz clutching an automatic rifle, glorifies violence. In Berry Park, it would be within blocks of three schools and two playgrounds.
“I don’t think young children should be exposed to that in that way - unsupervised by their parents or any adults,” said Emily Cassidy, one of the mothers.
The parents have circulated fliers opposing the design and location of the statue at the southeast corner of South Lowell Boulevard and West Berry Avenue, in a triangle formed by Goddard Middle School, Community School for the Gifted and Centennial Elementary School.
They sent a letter to school board members, nearby residents, members of parent-teacher organizations and others to protest “the statue’s particular location.”
Linda Cuesta, the parent of a child who was at Columbine High School during the deadly April 1999 shootings, said that memory “colors everything in my life,” but she is sympathetic to the Dietz family.
“As much as it breaks my heart to do this, we have to weigh the effect of the statue in this particular place against the family’s feelings,” she said.
“Who wins here? It’s a tough situation.”
Dietz’s father said the family is devastated by the uproar.
“It broke our hearts,” said Dan Dietz, who still lives in the area. “My son was fighting for her freedom to do exactly what she is doing. She put my son in the same category as Columbine. How does she have the audacity to do that?”
On June 28, 2005, Dietz and three other Navy SEALs were ambushed by al-Qaeda guerrillas. Dietz, 25, severely wounded, fought off attackers for more than 45 minutes, allowing one of his team members to escape.
Dietz received the Navy Cross, the Navy’s second-highest medal.
“The people who have never served in the armed forces are always the ones who speak the loudest against what the armed forces have done,” said Allan Stone of the Pat Hannon VFW Post No. 4666 in Littleton, which helped raise nearly $42,000 for the sculpture.
Cassidy said the opposition is in no way meant to offend the family or denigrate Dietz’s service.
“We have absolutely no issue with the family, and we have only good feelings for the soldier and what he did for this country,” Cassidy said.
Kelli Narde, spokeswoman for the city of Littleton, said complaints about the statue are arriving “at the eleventh hour,” too late to change the statue, which has already been cast.
“We’re proceeding with the plan,” she said.
“This opposition has come as a complete surprise; it’s been such a public process.”
Narde said Cuesta is the only person to formally approach the council about relocating the statue. It will be unveiled in Berry Park on July 4, the second anniversary of the recovery of Dietz’s body on a mountainside in Afghanistan.
Cassidy and Cuesta said the memorial was no secret, but the parents opposing it had no idea the rifle would be a focal point.
And while war memorials nationwide include rifles, swords, cannons and battleships, “trends are changing,” said Cuesta, who has advocated on behalf of stronger gun laws.
Sculptor Robert Henderson of Cañon City said Dietz is holding the rifle in a “parade-rest” position on one knee, somewhere between “at attention and at ease.”
He hopes schoolchildren could use it in their studies, in discussing war.
“Every piece that I make, somebody is not going to like it,” Henderson said. “Most of the people do, but you can’t satisfy everybody.”
The pacification of our populace continues apace.
[T]he parents opposing it had no idea the rifle would be a focal point.
It sounds like the rifle is only the focal point for these parents.
For most people the man would be the focal point.
(Thanks to Tammi for the heads up.)
Related Articles:
23 Responses to “CO Parents Fight Statue Of Afghan War Hero”
Leave a Reply
You must be registered and logged in to post a comment.
April 6th, 2007 at 2:14 am
[Moved from the "Missed News" section -- SG]
I’m really surprised I haven’t seen this one here already:
Parents protest military statue
[ ... ]
[ ... ]
[ ... ]
Amen, Mr. Stone. Ms. Cassidy and Ms. Cuesta need to realize it’s the sacrifice of people like Mr. Dietz that allow them to be such pathetic whiners.
April 6th, 2007 at 11:03 am
“Linda Cuesta, the parent of a child who was at Columbine High School during the deadly April 1999 shootings, said that memory “colors everything in my life,” but she is sympathetic to the Dietz family.”
Sure she is sympathetic…..bullshit. She is “pathetic”.
She claims times are changing when it comes to memorials and she really is right about that. These asshats have no pride in their country or the people that defend and die for it. They would rather have their kids living in a artificially colored dream world where there is no evil. Their little boys can read about it in some fantasy coloring book while sitting on their fuzzy pink toilet seat to pee. She won’t have to worry about the “boogy man” coming to Columbine to kill her kids. They will already be dead from the invasion of some foreign invader that her kids were not prepared to fight. Where the hell or the “MEN” in these families that allow this to happen?
April 6th, 2007 at 11:04 am
Thanks SG.
The man is definitely the focal point for me. He is a hero. God Bless his family during this Easter season and may he rest in peace.
April 6th, 2007 at 12:13 pm
God bless the Dietz family.
If Cuesta is the only one complaining than perhaps she should find another park to visit.
April 6th, 2007 at 12:22 pm
From The Rocky Mountain News:
I believe Linda Cuesta’s “color” is ignorance.
April 6th, 2007 at 12:23 pm
I sincerely believe that these people spend their entire lives looking for ways to be offended. As if being offended was a death sentence. They need to get a life and stop wearing their feelings on their sleeves.
April 6th, 2007 at 12:40 pm
And while we are praying for the Dietz family, we need to add Marine CPL David Emery and Marine LT Andrew Kinard - both fighting for their lives after injury in Iraq. You can read both their stories on Blackfive.
I can’t stomach this blatent attack on patriotism - if you don’t want to see it - don’t go. It is part of America’s historical and patriotic tradition.
I agree with the comparison that Dietz’s widow made - more logical and common sense than the liberal rantings.
This is America - put it to a vote. Majority wins that is our historical tradition.
April 6th, 2007 at 3:33 pm
Maybe we should protest the Minute Man Memorial at Concord, Massachussetts. After all, the citizen/soldier is holding a rifle and even in an upright, ready position.
There are moonbats everywhere, hanging from their lofty perches, ready to protest anything and everything.
But of course, I wonder if anyone bothered to ask Linda Cuesta if her kid listened to gangsta rap or wore a Che’ t-shirt.
April 6th, 2007 at 4:21 pm
I only have a minute…but, this Cuesta woman should go home, lock the doors, close the drapes, get in the shower, close the curtain, turn on the cold water and just sit there for the rest of her life. SHE is offended by something? Who gives a rat’s ass if she is? Stay the hell away from the statue!!! I, and many more like me are patently offended by her actions! I demand she give up her right to see outside her shower curtain. She is a putz, and regardless of how she sees things, that is her myopic unstable viewpoint, and as such, she needs to
A: Move
B: Stay in the house
C: seek professional help…soon
D: Check into rehab
E: Sign up for “Tater stick” therapy
F: Deal with the fact that the statue is of an American Hero….not put there for her to have any opinion about. It doesnt concern her, and everyone thinks she hides pumpkins in her basement and dresses them late at night.
G: Put Liquid Drano in her Visine bottle
H: EFF OFF, and stop offending everyone but herself.
April 6th, 2007 at 5:03 pm
Of course these mothers would want men with guns to come rescue their children when the “next Columbine” is not kids with guns but rather the American version of the Beslan school siege.
Freedom’s not free and is fought for and won by soldiers (and citizens) with guns, regardless of how much the peaceniks would like to wish that bit of reality away…
April 6th, 2007 at 5:05 pm
Glorifies violence? I say it glorifies the ultimate sacrifices made by brave young men to keep this country free.
“We have absolutely no issue with the family, and we have only good feelings for the soldier and what he did for this country,” Cassidy said. They just don’t want to be reminded of it.
“Cassidy said the opposition is in no way meant to offend the family or denigrate Dietz’s service.” Well, it does.
Courageously fighting to the death for family, God and country has been made to look like a very bad thing.
Their ingratitude sickens me. Shame on them all.
April 6th, 2007 at 5:34 pm
Retire, I’m sad to say it, but there have been protests about the Minuteman statue. Remember, the people of Massechussettes are the folks who gave us Barney Frank, Ted “Lifeguard” Kennedy, boy-buggerer Gerry Studds, and John F’n Kerry.
Exactly. And this is why they’re protesting it. If they had a problem with violence, you’d think they wouldn’t let their kids listen to gansta rap ’songs’ about slapping women around and shooting rivals.
April 7th, 2007 at 10:27 am
Update:
Memorial set in stone
Parents of slain SEAL surprised by all the flak
[ ... ]
My favorite part:
April 7th, 2007 at 11:01 am
I’ve really appreciated all these comments have to offer. The last one brings up another point when the group of police officers stood up and applauded the family. Police officers? Don’t they carry guns? Do they glorify violence? Well, I’m sure if some of these whiners had their way, police officers would not be armed either.
April 7th, 2007 at 1:06 pm
Notice the difference ,
“We realised that, had we resisted, we would have faced a major fight … we made a conscious decision not to engage the Iranians. They boarded our boats, removed our weapons and took us to shore.”
President Bush’s remarks about Dietz and fellow Navy SEAL Matthew Axelson last September:
I think of two Navy SEALs named Matthew Axelson and Danny [Dietz]. In June of 2005, they were part of a SEAL team operating deep in the mountains of Afghanistan on a mission to kill or capture a Taliban leader. They were discovered, and they were soon surrounded in a mountain ravine by 30 to 40 Taliban fighters. During the firefight that ensued, Axelson urged an injured teammate to escape, and he provided cover before suffering a mortal wound. Fighting nearby, his partner [Dietz] was also mortally wounded, but he too stood his ground and kept firing until finally, he finally died.
Because of the courage of Petty Officers Axelson and [Dietz], their wounded teammate made it out alive. For their heroism, these two Petty Officers were awarded the Navy Cross. But I want you to hear what Petty Officer [Dietz]’s wife said about her husband and his comrades in arms. She said, “Danny and his brothers went toward evil and ran forward and gave their last breath.”
We live in freedom because of the courage of men like Matthew and Danny. And we will honor their sacrifice by completing the mission. (Applause.) From Afghanistan and Iraq to Africa and Southeast Asia, we are engaged in a struggle against violent extremists — a struggle which will help determine the destiny of the civilized world. We’ve borne these responsibilities before, and we have seen our faith in freedom vindicated by history. In this young century, a new generation of Americans is being called to defend liberty — and once again the cause of liberty and peace will prevail.
April 7th, 2007 at 1:59 pm
1st…….please don’t compare the actions of a SEAL Team in Afghanistan with the actions of a bunch of low level, obviously untrained bunch of yahoo’s on zodiacs from the U.K. It’s like comparing Ronald Reagan with Nancy Pelosi for god’s sake. And it does a disservice to the SEALs.
April 7th, 2007 at 2:03 pm
Which comes first WI, The mission or your life?
April 7th, 2007 at 6:05 pm
1st…..it really depends on the mission doesn’t it? But again, comparing the mission the Brits were on with what the SEAL Team was doing is comparing apples and oranges. The Brits, I’m absolutely sure, were not properly trained to deal with any confrontation with the Iranians and they should have expected support from the “mothership” frigate and the helo crew in the event it did happen. The SEAL Team mission that GM2 Danny Dietz was part of when he was KIA was probably operating covertly with no expectation of someone coming to bail them out in the event of ambush. What sets them apart, is that Dietz’s team recognized that they would be dead, no matter what they did, and Dietz and PO2 Matthew Axelson decided to take the hit to get at least one member of their unit out alive. I just don’t see the comparison between the two battles. Additionally, if the Brits were operating under our Code of Conduct, it was up to the senior officer present (SOPA) to determine if they should surrender based on an inablilty to resist (not to commit sure suicide). That’s what he did. No different than CDR Bucher did with the USS Pueblo in waters off N. Korea.
Now, do I think these Brits acted in a stellar manner to be proud of while in captivity? No, I don’t. But unless one has been in that situation, I don’t think one has the moral authority to judge them either. I know when I was in VietNam, one thing that was always in my mind was what would I do if I faced capture or was actually captured. I don’t think, to this day, I really know the answer to that question, and to be honest, I’m really glad I didn’t have to find out. And I had the benefit of the full blown E & E course, including the POW camp Hawaii before I was deployed.
The real criticism should be directed at the U.K. Navy for the way they prepared these people and the way they didn’t back them up when necessary. Of course that’s not right because the real criticism should be directed toward the Iranians for pulling this crap to begin with.
April 7th, 2007 at 6:19 pm
Well I do know for a fact that me and 3 other folks were surrounded at one time and we drew straws as to who would run to draw attention.
I drew the short straw.
At one point I had a NVA LT piss within 3-4 inches of my face, splattering it all over me during the E&e as you call it.
I was just a young grunt but I made it out alive and so did the rest of the others.
Can’t say the same thing for some of the NVA.
April 7th, 2007 at 6:25 pm
“But unless one has been in that situation”
That’s my words….and so you have been there and learned the answer to the question I never had to. Semper Fi.
April 7th, 2007 at 6:29 pm
WI, I agree with you for the most part, I wouldn’t begin to guess how I would act as a captive, only that I would hope that I would be able to keep my honor. However, I think you have the wrong impression about the Royal Marines. They are nothing like our Marines, in that they are considered to be somewhat like our Rangers. They are highly trained semi-special forces. There isn’t nearly as many Royal Marines (around 10k give or take) as there are US Marines.
They do have the training to fight, and fiercely. I am not to sure what their code of conduct is when captured, I’ll have to ask my brother-in-law that (he was in the Royal Marines), but judging from what I know of him, you don’t want to cross these guys in a fire-fight.
Personally, I think their capture is a combination of fog-of-war, they were ambushed, and confusing rules of engagement. I had read in an article, can’t remember where right now, that the frigate that was their mothership had to contact London in order to secure permission to engage the enemy. I think whoever it was left to, to give permission to fire hesitated, and I don’t think the Brits want to admit that, but thats just IMHO.
It would have been nice to read a headline that said “British Frigate Blasts Iranian Gunboats out of the Water as they Approached Friendly Forces in Iraqi Waters”, and the sub header should have read, “Nothing but small oil slick left of Iranian vessels”. But, alas, more wishful thinking…
April 7th, 2007 at 6:46 pm
SinCity…..according to the reports I’ve read, and most seem to agree, you have it right about the radio contact with London for permission to engage by the frigate. The reports also say the frigate wasn’t closer to the boarding party because the water was too shallow, according to the Brits. I don’t understand how the ship they were boarding was there if the water was so shallow. Something doesn’t sit right with that excuse. And that’s still no excuse for the Helo that was supposed to be giving them air cover not doing anything.
I don’t know much about the Royal Marines other than pounding pints with them in Hong Kong and Singapore many years ago. They seemed ok but I would take a good U. S. Marine in a fight any day of the week. The British Government screwed this up from the beginning by not preparing for what might, and did happen. I really don’t believe the thought ever crossed their minds. A gross violation of the 7-P principle.
One last thing about the released troops….After listening to their TV interview from home, I didn’t get the impression that these were the brightest bulbs on the tree from listening to them.
April 7th, 2007 at 7:48 pm
Just out of curiosity, I looked up on the Royal Navy Website, what the Brits arm their frigates with ( http://www.royal-navy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.1244 ) it seems that their 5″ gun would make quick work out of those Iranian gunboats. My understanding is that the frigate really wasn’t that far away.
And, WI, I think you are spot on with your second paragraph, I’ll take a Devil Dog covering my butt any day of the week. My bro-in-law was in the RM Commandos, there are a couple of other units that are smaller, and not as well trained. It seems that this group falls into that category.
Oh ya, to get on topic, the tradition of memorializing war heros goes back to ancient Egypt, some 3500 years ago. Who do these nitty busybodies think they are? Do they actually think that their kid is going to go to this park, look at the statue, then pick up a rifle and start shooting up the place? Talk about simple minded. The truth, IMHO, is pretty obvious, these two families profiled in the article, that are opposed to the statue are just attention whores. The Dietz family seemed honored that their fallen son would be memorialized in statue, and that they would go about their lives quietly. Talk about contrast!