Controversial group joins Auburn veterans parade
AUBURN, Wash. - The 47th annual Grand Veterans Day Parade rolled through the streets of Auburn on Saturday - and it included one controversial group of veterans that the city had tried to ban.
Veterans for Peace won the right to march in the parade through a court ruling and with help from the American Civil Liberties Union. And the reaction from spectators was varied.
For the most part, the parade provided a chance for people to express their gratitude for those who served long ago, for those serving now - and for all those who never came back.
One group of veterans, however, nearly lost its chance to march in this parade.
"We are no less veterans simply because we believe peace is the proper approach in this world and not wars," says David Kannis, a member of Veterans For Peace.
Veterans for Peace won a last-minute court battle to participate after the city of Auburn tried to exclude the organization. The city argued that the group's anti-war message ran counter to the purpose of the parade.
"They just had to be told by a federal judge that they're wrong," says Kannis.
Along the parade route, some said they believe the city was right.
"It's just not fitting," says Connie Hill, who found the presence of the Veterans For Peace a distraction. "They can have their own parade. ... They come from an opposite view of what this whole parade stands for."
It's a point of view that frustrates Kannis.
"They have forgotten what the First Amendment is all about," he says.
But along the crowded sidewalks of Auburn, you saw mostly expressions of support for the Veterans for Peace - and the idea that free speech is one of the fundamental rights they all fought for in the first place.
The mayor said Auburn believes in abiding by court rulings, and it's time to move forward. He thought the dispute took nothing at all away from the splendor of the day.
Veterans for Peace won the right to march in the parade through a court ruling and with help from the American Civil Liberties Union. And the reaction from spectators was varied.
For the most part, the parade provided a chance for people to express their gratitude for those who served long ago, for those serving now - and for all those who never came back.
One group of veterans, however, nearly lost its chance to march in this parade.
"We are no less veterans simply because we believe peace is the proper approach in this world and not wars," says David Kannis, a member of Veterans For Peace.
Veterans for Peace won a last-minute court battle to participate after the city of Auburn tried to exclude the organization. The city argued that the group's anti-war message ran counter to the purpose of the parade.
"They just had to be told by a federal judge that they're wrong," says Kannis.
Along the parade route, some said they believe the city was right.
"It's just not fitting," says Connie Hill, who found the presence of the Veterans For Peace a distraction. "They can have their own parade. ... They come from an opposite view of what this whole parade stands for."
It's a point of view that frustrates Kannis.
"They have forgotten what the First Amendment is all about," he says.
But along the crowded sidewalks of Auburn, you saw mostly expressions of support for the Veterans for Peace - and the idea that free speech is one of the fundamental rights they all fought for in the first place.
The mayor said Auburn believes in abiding by court rulings, and it's time to move forward. He thought the dispute took nothing at all away from the splendor of the day.
Bitter old, resentful  ghouls oppose Veterans For Peace. It has become more and more clear you would have to be out of your mind to serve a country where freedom of thought is not permitted. The city  of Auburn should be ashamed to not let  these vets march. Â
Veterans for peace is nothing more than a misguided and disrespectful group of individuals for implying the other veterans are Veterans for war.Â
 @javajoe Yawn.  Go back to listening to Rush Limbaugh, he is is a shining example of bravery and experience in the military. Oh wait, he got out of it because he had a boil on his butt.  Then perhaps you can go listen to another pro-war republican, Ted Nugent. Wait, he purposely soiled in his own pants for a few days before showing up before the Draft Board, to get out of service. Dick Cheney? Deferment. Romney protested FOR the Draft, then headed to Paris on a deferment.  And you want to talk smack about actual VETERANS of war?  Typical.Â
How sick is that? Â The backward City of Auburn trying to block a VETERAN group, because they believe in PEACE rather than war. Â So really? Does anyone really believe in war? Is that your preference when it comes to solving problems? Having a bunch of old men, usually who never saw battle sending your family into war? Â Honor the people who served in the rich men's wars, by allowing those who have served to say that Peace is not unAmerican.Â
Â
Really? Controversial?? People who have been in wars, and have seen the human tolls, prefer peace to war, is "controversial?" Â Ridiculous. Â Who better to talk about peace instead of war, than the people who fought? Instead of the fat-headed, big-assed, multi-millionaire draft dodgers like Rush Limbaugh and Dick Cheney???Â
 @DT I agree. It completely blows my mind that they are upset because these VETERANS who fought for our country are for peace. It's insane. I wonder if these same Auburn leaders ever served?
"The stand for the opposite of what the parade stands for". Uh, shouldn't all veterans be for peace? Does this mean the other veterans are for war?
Â
They fought in wars for "our freedom" so I think it's only fitting that they enjoy the 1st amendment. They fought for it. They earned it. It's their right.
I don't care what their views are, as long as they perform their duty then they can have whatever view they want. I am sure there are plenty of soldiers serving today that feel that war isn't the answer even though they may be serving in a warzone.Â
Â
Serving in the military does not mean you are pro war.Â
Â
Thank you to all veterans past and present who served to protect our freedoms.Â
Hill..." they come from an opposite view of what this parade stands for..." Â What the hell is that? Â Please explain.
 @teahater apparently the parade stands for suppressing the very rights they supposedly fought for over there. Or perhaps the parade stands for the chickenhawks on tv and radio who want to send your loved ones to war for the profit of the defense contractors.Â
WTF Auburn, SERIOUSLY WTF.
Â
These guys served in war and defended the right for free speech that they're using - Connie Hill, I'd suggest you thank them along will ALL the other vets in that parade for their service.
Â
Happy Veteran's Day to all our men and women at arms or former men and women at arms!
I am glad they got to be in the parade; otherwise what ARE we fighting for? I do not like the idea people seem to have that, to be a "twue" veteran, you have to be pro-conflict.Â
I think the city of Auburn and Ms. Hill are smoking crack. And both are wrong! I am a vet, a proud vet, and I support what this group is about. As vets, we did anything that was asked of us, no matter what. So if anyone, anywhere has the right to voice an opinion, it's vets. I would be proud to see them in a veterans parade, any time.Â
Glad the ACLU is keeping busy.
I don't understand how a Veteran's group promoting peace is controversial...
 @Supreme_Being253 Republicans love war.
Peace is something liberals do. And liberals are socialist, and hitler was a socialist.Â
Â
Â
War should be the last resort.
Some people will do anything to get their name and maybe even a picture in the paper or / and on TV. Lets just hope this is their 15 min of fame and now they will go away. Ps : yes I'm a vet and been in combat so I know a little about what I'm talking about.
 @lmdk2 You have "been in combat", and you still love war?
You are either a liar, or mentally disturbed...
Any person, veteran or not, who ISN'T for peace never saw action, watched their buddies being blown to pieces, cities destroyed, civilians raped and murdered.
Â
To say veterans represent the opposite of the message "veterans for Peace" is pretty close to the most inane, stupid, misguided statement I've ever seen. These veterans have earned their right to march wherever in hell they want, no court need intervene.
Â
Daughter of a WWII combat veteran and Korean war MIA. NO MORE WARS!
Why are they even being called "controversial"? I don't know anyone, military or not, who thinks war is a good thing. These are men and women who have served our country and are voicing that sentiment.
Also, who wants to bet that Ms. Hill would've been right at the front of the line to spit on returning soldiers from Vietnam, calling them rapists and murderers and baby killers?
"They come from an opposite view of what this whole parade stands for."
Â
I think the lady is the one who has the wrong view of what a Veterans Day parade stands for. It's to honor those who served, many completely not by their own choice. It's not meant as a glorification of war. If anything, those who served and believe that peace is a better solution should be marching at the front of the parade, not having to go to court just to be allowed in the parade.
 @Mikeftm "It's not meant as a glorification of war."
No, it isn't. It is a remembrance of all those who have served this country - in peace and war - regardless of their personal feelings. As these people did.
They EARNED the right to march in that parade, just as any other vet did.
Â
I served in the Army from '61 to '64, the Guard for 3 more years, I am a vet. When I attended one of the JC's in '68 I heard of a veteran's group forming...I went to the first meeting - and was told that I was NOT a "Veteran" because I had served before 'Nam...
I looked him straight in the eye, turned around and walked out.
So this kind of prejudice is not new, but it's still just as stupid as it always was.
The point is, these people served our country. They EARNED the right to march.
Â
 @Mikeftm I was thinking the exact same thing when I heard that. What a crazy lady...
I am a Civil War reenactor and a combat veteran, so I have several thoughts about all this.
Â
First off, when I swore to 'uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic', that pretty much covered these guys. In fact, that SPECIFICALLY covered these guys inasmuch as the First Amendment was enshrined to preserve the right to dissent.
Â
Generally speaking, the biggest advocates for peace that I have ever known have been those who, in whatever capacity, have been on a battlefield.
Â
I find it rather odd that the most vociferous opponents of this group seem to be people who have never served in the military. I can understand military spouses thinking the group is disrespectful. They're not, but I understand where the spouses might feel that way.
Â
I'd rather have my views challenged by a veteran than some hippy anarchist kid who's calling me a fascist while wearing Nike shoes and American Apparel jeans.
Â
When the VFP paraded, they had the US flag respectfully placed at the front-center of their formation, just like it was supposed to be. Myself and every other member of my Association Presented Arms just like we did for every Cub Scout Troop, Vets motorcycle club, and marching band that walked down Main Street that beautiful, cold, sunny November day.
Â
Here's a tip of an old cavalryman's Stetson to all my brothers and sisters in arms, past present or future. Few who have given up comfort for duty, security for fearfulness will ever understand what it means when the National Colors pass by.
Â
Â
Â
This comment has been deleted
 @jdoll88 Hey guys he is just trolling. Ignore him and he will go away.
 @jdoll88 you can say that becouse of all the vets in this county and as a gulf war combat vet i was one to give you that right.
in a hundred years no one will care about ref 74 or pot but they will all the vets that came before them
@jdoll88 As one of those 'senile old vets' let me just remind you that Stonewall was only 40 years ago. And ten years before that, LBGTs were being sent to Sachsenhausen with a pink triangle on their prison attire. It wasn't a regiment of transgenders that liberated that camp, was it?
Â
And for that matter, your commentary urinates on the sacrifices of all those in the LGBT community who silently served while having to hide who they were. THOSE are also the 'senile old vets' you disparage in your comment.
Â
You would do well, sir or madam, to not parade your ignorance in such a fashion.
Just remember......we are in a free country,people have their right to voice their opinions.
 @scychan Only because Veterans have defended that right since 1776
1776-for our Independence.
Others (war) are /were not necessary or not legal and violating our conscience,
and our soldiers died for NOTHING !!
It seems pretty simple to me. A Veterans group wants to participate in a Veterans parade; end of story. Must we argue about everything?
Not a single posting here supporting the view of the city of Auburn or Connie Hill. That makes me proud.
Â
Welcome home Brothers and Sisters and thank you for your service.
Â
HM2 USN/USMC Golf 2/9 RVN 69-70, DAV, VVA
 @Hagar Thank you, Hagar, and Happy Veterans Day to you tomorrow.
My only problem with this group is their name, Veterans for Peace. Aren't all (or at least MOST) veterans for peace? My brother is a veteran and I know he would rather have problems solved through diplomatic means than through war. My father is a veteran and I know he feels the same way. Two of my nephews are veterans (one of whom is about to deploy to the Middle East for the second time) and I know they prefer diplomacy. My son-in-law is not a veteran but is in his first year of service in the military and I that while he would have no problem going to war for his country, he would prefer it if issues could be resolved in a peaceful manner. So what I'm saying is that just because most veterans don't belong to this group or go around wearing shirts that say Veterans for Peace on them, that is exactly what they stand for.
 @justathought Sorry but Veterans Who Acknowledge that Most Vets Prefer Peace, But We are For Exhausting All Options First, wouldn't fit on the banner.  I think you're splitting hairs here, and creating drama where there doesn't need to be.Â
 @justathought I agree with you that most who served/still serve prefer peace over war any day. It's just that those brave men and women have already made the decision that IF war does happen they will be there to fight. The word "Veteran" also encompasses active duty. Once you join the military for however long you serve(whether it be 6 months or 30 years), you are now a Vet. My husband is active duty Navy for over 20 year. My son in law of 2 years is also active duty Navy as well as many other family members in all branches of our service. I wish ALL VETERANS a blessed, peaceful day.
@justathought No one who has ever seen a battlefield ever wants to see another one.
Thank You! to all of our Veterans. Freedom is not free. Â All gave some, but some gave all. We thank all who served and remember those who gave all. Bless you.
I'm not a member of the group this article is about. I don't know anyone in that group. I have no agenda. That being said, I served 26 years in the Army and the Air Force. I did what I was told because that's what I signed up to do. That doesn't mean I like it or agreed with it. Now that I'm retired, I have the right to say what I think. People like Connie Hill are the problem, not the veterans who have a right to say what they think is a better option to diplomacy, not immediately going to war. People with shallow insight and one dimensional thought are intellectually taxing because they fail to understand others' points of view. Just because you don't like it, doesn't make it illegal or wrong. These men and women are just saying there are other paths to accomplishing goals, that's it, nothing more. They're not like that ridiculous church that's calling dead soldiers fags or whatever they say. They're just vets who want people to use their brains. And it's sad that a judge had to remind the whiner people of the 1st amendment that allows people to say these things. Irony in full effect.
@jelisized Being a vet myself, I have nothing but respect for our vets and all that proudly served. That being said, I also believe in out constitution. Because those in this group served honorably, I salute them. Because they believe in means other than battle, I respect their opinion.
 @NoiseMan  @jelisized Thank you BOTH for your military service.
Thanks to all the veterans. Happy Veterans Day.
I'm a veteran of war and I hate [war]. I have a lot of respect for everyone that has followed orders and served without question. Every soldier I served with in battle prayed for peace all the time, and without shame.
Â
This does not take way from the purpose of the parade, it adds a great deal.
@komoispropaganda
I hate war as only a soldier who has lived it can, only as one who has seen its brutality, its futility, its stupidity.
~Dwight D. Eisenhower
Â
Peace cannot be kept by force. It can only be achieved by understanding.
~Albert Einstein
Jeez, I clicked on this thinking it was those nutballs who protest at military funerals, but no, it's just veterans in favor of peace with no war. Â Sheesh, what's the problem with that? Â They still served their country, for crying out loud!
 @Doxie Definitely. I don't like how there are certain people who think their service means any less because they desire peace - THEY STILL SERVED!
If they are totally against war, then let me tell you ...they have the correct view on war. IMO, their participation adds a lot to a Veterans Day Parade.
These are VETS. They served in WARS for our country. As far as I'm concerned, they can go wherever they want, do WHATEVER they want, and speak up for anything they believe in at any time. They EARNED it. Which is a helluva lot more than most of these windbag politicians have ever done.
Well I don't really see the issue. Just because you could be against war doesn't mean you will be against the troops. 2 completely different things.