|
|||||||||
Posted February 5, 2003
Regarding 'The Kook Factor' by Justin Raimondo:
I have read part of the Left Behind series. I read with interest to see just how the authors put the story together. However, it became evident that the message was not the key after all. The series was originally only six or seven installments. Now, it adds the 11th. To me, it was about money, not about "salvation." In truth, truth is not for sale. These authors have missed the boat, using a mysterious subject for personal gain. Then again, they are not the only ones guilty of the same thing. Many other Christian authors just rewrite their previous stories to match the times. If they are wrong again, then once again comes the rewrite.
This is not Christianity as I would envision it to be; nor, do I believe that even Jesus would want it that way!
~ Rod Creech, Evansville, Indiana
Wow! The "Rapture" movement of the Christian right can be defined and recognized as the extreme fundamentalist ideology that it is. As with any far-reaching fundamentalist sect it has nothing to do with the theology – Christianity, Islam, Judaism – that it claims to be a part of. But more importantly, groups like these are nothing more than a small, unstable faction. I think Raimondo is giving these people way too much credit. If members of the Bush administration started going into seizures, speaking in tongues, and whipping snakes out of their back pockets (and yes, I do realize this closely resembles a Pentecostal service), I'd maybe give some thought to what his column was trying to say. But sorry, I don't believe the "Rapture" movement has taken over as the number one motivating factor of the neo-conservatives, and it is definitely not Christianity. So Justin can probably hold off on falling before the feet of Satan.
What's more disturbing is that he's hinging his argument on the influential capability of a popular fiction series. Are you kidding me with this? I've never read any of the "Left Behind" books so I'm not an authority on the quality of the writing, but popular fiction does not have the awe-inspiring powers Raimondo seems to believe it has. By his rationale, James Waller's The Bridges of Madison County should have set forth a wave of adultery that the world has never seen before.
I'd comment on the rest of the column but I can't figure out what the point was. After making the leap from the "Rapture" movement is Christianity to Christians (among others) nationwide are beginning to reject the war party's vision for the world, it's nothing more than an endless tirade against obscure individuals who have declared war on the antiwar movement – one which read like Justin was wrestling with his own shadow.
I've come to rely on Antiwar.com and Justin's column as one of the top sources for antiwar arguments, libertarian theory, and quality analysis of current events. I've even got my liberal high school-teaching sister to share some his material with her class. I do realize that writers get tired and can not be expected to be at the top of their game 24/7, but Raimondo really lost me on this one.
A coworker described this column as Raimondo's "jumping the shark" episode. All I can say is, I hope not.
So, Raimondo's a seditionist for writing that the American military might conduct some independent thought. Perhaps using the internet and email in such a manner is such a crime. If so, expect arrest warrants issued by Saddam because it seems our military has been encouraging wholesale defections of the entire Iraqi military. Oops, sorry, I forgot, laws only apply to those not in the pay of the American Empire.
~ Mark T. Seiler, Bessemer City, North Carolina
Two quick comments:
1) The claim that "the United for Peace campaign...has become the fulcrum of antiwar activism in the U.S." is pure nonsense. "May" become might be acceptable, if only as an expression of your personal wishes, but "has" become? ...
2) The claim that "I was not the only observer to note that the most popular slogan was 'Peace is Patriotic' is just 100% bullsh*t. I was there, and I've got pictures to prove it (as do thousands of other people). There certainly were "Peace is Patriotic" signs. A few. The most popular slogan was "Stop the war against Iraq" as expressed on the signs that were being distributed (for a contribution) by ANSWER. After that, the most striking feature was the diversity of slogans, not their commonality.
~ Steven Patt, Cupertino, California
I just wanted to thank you for the best laugh I've had in a while – I followed the link on your latest article to the "Justin Raimondo Watch"! What a lot of nonsense. I see you are gay – just like Adolf Hitler. I didn't realise that Hitler was gay – well actually, I'm fairly sure he wasn't. But it sounds good, doesn't it – gay like Hitler. And like Hitler, your mother must have been Jewish, since that is the only thing that explains your "hatred" of Jews. Ha, ha! The fact that some of your countrymen seem to consider Israel's interests more important than the US's interests might be the real reason for your concern. But who can expect sense out of people who mentioned that you are gay at least 10 times in the few paragraphs I read. They wouldn't be homophobic, now would they?
Thanks to Antiwar.com for one of the best news sites on the net.
~ KV, Johannesburg, South Africa
There is one small point on an aside I would like to make, Justin states "and they say the Muslims are mired in 'Medievalism'!" This is an unfair characterisation of our Medieval forebears. The theological thought of that time was immeasurably superior to the horsesh*t we get from these idiots like LeHaye and Jenkins. Personally, I was a rather contented Agnostic until I took a class in college on Medieval theology, and I found the subject in the translated text of Augustine, Aquinis, William of Okham, Duns Scotus, and the like, more challenging than I was led to believe. Of course, the same can be said of Medieval Islam in comparison with the modern variant as well.
Regarding 'India Should Oppose War on Iraq, But Will It?' by Praful Bidwai:
India won't oppose the war on Iraq. My reasoning follows:
While India currently does a fair amount of business with Iraq, how much more could India do if Saddam Hussein was no longer in power?
While Iraq no longer uses dollars in any of its national bank accounts, India still does. It's unlikely they'll abandon the dollar just to please Saddam Hussein.
India still has to resolve its border issues with neighboring Pakistan peacefully before deciding to oppose a US-led war against Iraq. And India doesn't need to fight Pakistan in the event the US asks Pakistan to intervene militarily against India for its opposition to the war.
India still does business with Israel and would be disinclined to listen to any requests from Baghdad that India end all of its trade business with Israel.
Iraq can not continue to act immaturely on the international level with respect to countries it has trade agreements with. If Iraq were to cut off trade with India because it still enjoys good relations with the US and the UK, Iraq would be hard-pressed to restore trade with India at a future date, should Saddam Hussein remain in power.
India still favors the building of a very large natural gas pipeline to have more of its energy needs met. There's currently a pipeline under consideration from Iran to India. Such a pipeline, by design, must go through both Afghanistan and Pakistan in order for it to reach India. Further, other pipelines from Cyprus, Egypt, Qatar and Russia also factor into the energy equation.
There's too much money on the international table for India to entrust an idiot like Saddam Hussein to be involved with it, especially with respect to the recent discoveries of new natural gas and oil fields in Iran, Egypt, and Cyprus, and with the talk of building so many new pipelines to carry it all. Put simply, Saddam Hussein is too irresponsible for the world to entrust him with a larger chunk of the world economy.
India doesn't want to upset the USA, especially with the current state of its trade with the USA. Many high-tech companies contract their work out to India. Additionally, a great many engineering and technology professionals come from India to the USA. The last thing India wants to do is to be denied immigration access to American technology firms. That means India can't afford to endanger its diplomatic relations with the USA. And the UK could always make India part of its empire again by military means, if it really wanted to. ...
~ George Mena, MenaReport.com, Fremont, California
India should send dozens and dozens of its fighter jets to Iraq and challenge the unilateral stand of the US.
As Tariq Aziz said in the Gulf War 12 years back: "UK is only a rat on the elephant." What can UK do by itself – other than talk? Zilch. It's comfortable for the rat to be up there (on the elephant) when there is big trouble on the ground.
It's time to stand up to the nonsense. India and/or Russia can stop such nonsense. The world does not need a "One-country Policeman." It needs all the countries to be together and aligned.
So, the entire thrust of your article is that a war against Iraq would aversely effect the economy of India and change the balance of power vis a vis the USA, India and Pakistan. This sounds very Indian egocentric. ... And if it's all about India in your mind, why shouldn't it be all about the US in our mind? Come on, you can do better than that!
India's stance on the issue in question should be based entirely on moral questions. Many nations base their actions or inactions on dispute of this nature on geopolitical considerations. Hence, we have a world that is drowning in its own blood. The question that India should ponder is: Is the US justified in attacking Iraq?
Regarding 'Our Reds, and Theirs' by Justin Raimondo:
"The Empire of the West functions largely in the same manner as the Soviets once did – and often with the cooperation of the same leading personnel."
Although they might have more seats on EU, I still agree, they're kept in line with economics and these turncoat leaders.
On talk of EU presidency – which Germany and France jointly proposed – he would be elected like the general secretary of CPSU Central Committee. Not by the people of member states. And for those who don't know what CPSU means, it's Communist Party of Soviet Union.
Even old hard-line leftist MEP Esko Seppänen is worried on loss of democracy and self-rule on union member states – a member of Convention for the Future of Europe which is drafting new constitution for EU. Even if you don't agree on political views, check his comments at www.kaapeli.fi/seppanen/english.htm
For me it seems that at both sides of Atlantic ocean democracy is rapidly deteriorating.
After having spent the last 7 years of my life in Poland escaping the hell of modern America, your take on Miller, Poland, and the ex-communists is beyond laughable. The press here is more free and independent than any in America at this time, and I mean the big daily newspapers.
The truth is, Poland's position is win-win. While everyone I know here disagrees with the war, its a very passive nation that doesn't yet understand the power of public opinion and protest. No one here feels that they can change the position of the government on almost anything. Call it a legacy of the totalitarian state. Poland's citizens are resigned to what the gubmint decides, she takes a position against Germany which bolsters some pride and independence in the face of her stronger neighbor, she gets big handouts like F-16s from the US (in your tirade, how could miss this little point?!) and she doesn't have to commit to anything in Iraq because she couldn't deliver anything anyway. And the terrorists are not about to start blowing things up in Poland. ...
Excuse me my poor English. Thank you for your excellent article "OUR REDS, AND THEIRS – A Stalinist joins the War Party and is welcomed with open arms". You might wonder why the old Stalinists, ex-communists and other criminals still rule in Poland. How come the people will elect them in free elections?
The secret is: mass media. The communists (and people like them) have almost monopoly on TV, radio and newspapers, because in 1989, when the changes came, they simply stole money from the state and invested them in, among others, media. They are able to carry out such massive propaganda of lies and half-truths that hardly anybody can stand against them.
You have no idea what you are talking about. Have you ever read Workers World newspaper? Does it ever mention Stalin? Only the bourgeois press speak of Stalin. Do you even realize that Stalin is only one leader who 'professed' to be communist? True Marxists, those whose socialism is scientific, support all people's struggles for independence from national oppression, colonialism and imperialism both physical and economic. The workers of socialist countries are also supported because to not support them undermines the goals of world socialism. ...
No one who is truly Marxist supports bureaucracy or opportunism, but we must support the people and their planned economy while they deal with the problems of totalitarianism unique to their nation. It certainly doesn't help when the imperial capitalist countries that surround workers states place embargoes and military pressure on them thus forcing these states to spend more money on defense than on social needs. Every nation's people have the right of self determination. Lenin, along with Trotsky and many others, orchestrated the October Revolution that brought the workers to power in Russia. Stalin was a bureaucrat and as such was not liked by either Lenin or Trotsky. Stalin betrayed the Revolution. That is a fact. He had Trotsky murdered! No one is apologizing for Stalin, much as you and the other 'red' baiters would like think so. You are misleading and poisoning the people with your stilted rhetoric, no doubt due to an infantile disorder. If you truly are antiwar and anti-occupation, stick to it. Leave the socialists and communists, unless you want to acknowledge there historical victories in this country i.e., Social Security, 8 hour work day, out of your sermons. Stop wasting people's time with your defense of the capitalist system that has brought us to this event in the first place. Communism, like any other ideology, includes left, right and center adherents. To paint all as Stalinist is disingenuous and false.
~ Scott Cossette, Santee, California
Regarding 'Smiles and Nods and Handouts' by Sascha Matuszak:
There
is inaccuracy in this paragraph:
"Some of the largest ships every [sic] built – roughly 1800
years ago – carried Chinese explorers, goods and largesse to India,
East Africa and up to Egypt. After the eunuchs were defeated by the scholars
at court, shipbuilding ceased."
1800 years ago China never had large ships that sailed to India, East Africa and up to Egypt. It was around 1421 under the Ming Dynasty (1368-1644) that China undertook maritime explorations under the eunuch Admiral Zheng He. Sascha Matuszak's comments, "After the eunuchs were defeated by the scholars at court, shipbuilding ceased," could only mean the cessation of Zheng He's expedition after his death from 1433.
For your readers' information, an amateur historian, Gavin Menzies of the British Navy, had written a book that puts doubt to the notion that Columbus discovered America in 1492. It was in 1421, according to Menzies, that Zheng He discovered America. He offered proofs in a book that has taken the world by storm, and some history books may have to be revised and rewritten.
I am a regular reader of your column. Though I don't always agree with you, I do enjoy it. Maybe partially because I am from Chengdu initially.
I just read your article "Smiles and Nods and Handouts" on Januar 31, 2003. I just wanna point out a few factual errors.
1. The maritime expedition of the Song Court didn't take place 1800 years ago (which would be dated around the 3rd century, which should be the era of the Eastern Han (time of three kingdoms). The expedition, led by a Muslim eunuch, happened around 1420. They visited as far as Mardacascas, and almost all over SE Asia, thanks to their inventions such as multi-masts, magnet-based compasses.
The demise of such expeditions on the surface may be attributed to battle at the imperial court, but one shouldn't forget the security issue facing the empire that time: the nomadic threat from the north was growing by each day. One may argue, the empire needed to contract into a defensive stance. The supra-stable political system at the time could carry whims through down to astonishing precision. Ships of over 2 masts weren't allowed, otherwise builder would face decapitation. Foreign trade was cut off (later the port at Canton was reopened). The Song court was the wealthiest and weakest among Sinic dynasties.
2. The most recent Chinese acquisition of Russian military hardware does include Soveremeny class destroyers, but none typed "Su-147". There isn't such a Sukhoi fighter-bomber. The one you mentioned is Su-30 MKK.
Free Willy
I
saw a very disturbing report on the evening news on January 30 about the
US military's plans to train dolphins for use in "anti-terrorist"
activities in the Persian Gulf in the event of a new war against Iraq.
It seems that the military is worried about terrorist attacks against
US forces in the Persian Gulf in the form of divers attaching explosives
to US war ships. They want to train dolphins to swim toward the divers
and attach a clamp to them attached to a rope so that they can be reeled
in. I find this to be extremely cruel, as it puts these innocent animals'
lives in danger from explosives and people with ill intentions, all for
the sake of a completely insane and unnecessary war.
If you're as appalled as I am by this use of animals, please call the Navy Public Affairs Office at 703-695-0965, and tell them that this use of dolphins is cruel and unnecessary. Tell them if they want to avoid terrorist attacks the logical solution is to stay out of the Persian Gulf in the first place.
Backtalk
editor Sam Koritz replies:
Actually, the Pentagon is more likely to deploy sea lions for this particular war. As this ABC News story – "Sea Lions Head to War" – explains sea lions "have the advantage of chasing an enemy from the water onto dry land."
Appeal to the People of the USA
This is an appeal from an ordinary woman in England. Please, please do all you can to encourage your people to rise up and say no! to the violence and terror directed by your unelected president. Many thousands of people in England are saying No to War!, but that is not enough because Bush is threatening Iraq with or without Blair's backing. We are behind you, but it will be your efforts that really make the difference.
I wake up at night in terror at what is going to happen to the poor people of Iraq, and what could happen in the rest of the world as a consequence.
Make a difference – this is the most important thing to be talking about and taking action about in the world today! Take courage!
There is a man who lives in my area who is going to Iraq as a witness for Peace very soon. On 15th February at least 41 coaches of protesters will leave my city of Sheffield in the north of England to go to London for a massive demonstration against war, 2 of these coaches will be full of samba band players an our supporters. We formed our band mainly to creatively demonstrate against war. My local antiwar group 'Heeley and Meersbrook Against War' is sending 2 coaches. We have stalls in the small local shopping areas every Saturday and the response from the ordinary people of the area has been very heartening. We had a meeting with our local member of Parliament recently, attended by 175 people, with very little advertising.
The British government wants to ban us from Hyde Park on 15th February, Michael Foot, an old Parliamentarian, will lead us in a mass trespass of the park if they don't lift the ban. Watch the British press, and take heart!
Nelson Mandela
There seems to be a systematic blackout of Nelson Mandela's recent extraordinary speech in which he labeled GW Bush a leader without foresight and a racist. Here in New Zealand coverage has been minimal, mostly national radio,little tv and no print mentions that I have seen. What's up in the US? I was surprised not to see the story listed on your site. The London Observer site supposedly has the full text of the speech. Today in Wellington about 100 "inspectors" wearing hard hats and white jump suits appeared at the US embassy demanding entry to look for womd. They were met by a huge police presence. NZ is playing it coy on the war buildup. Prime Minister Clark wants UN cover for any attack but she has dispatched a frigate to the gulf for "the war against terrorism" and "humanitarianism". We do so want the Americans to like us and will do just about anything if they'll only buy our lamb, wool and butter. Most kiwis are ambivalent at best about Bush's motives. It is slowly sinking in that he is not a straight shooter.
~ Mike Schapiro Auckland, New Zealand
The Axle of Wonk
It is interesting to observe the antics of the Bush Administration's attempt to gain support for the upcoming attack on Iraq. It seems we have an old guard bunkered down in the White House, reminiscent of the blundering cavalry officers in the First World war which makes one want to reach for Alice in Wonderland and a teacup of sanity.
Instead of realising that the Cold War had become irrelevant, they thought they had won first prize in the local Gymkhana, even though the only competing horse had sprained a fetlock. Now they are demanding their rosette as the last remaining superpower! It is quite obvious that they used 9/11 as an 'Opportunity profile' to trigger their plans for hegemony. In fact they couldn't resist it. After an easy warm up on Afghanistan, it was onward to Baghdad, with a propaganda campaign straight out of Orwell's 1984. (I could quote Orwell endlessly on this subject, but will not, as once started, I could never stop). The attack on Afghanistan had the world's blessing after 9/11, but the world's last remaining dinosaur blundered into the mire of World opinion when it switched prey. Saddam miscalculated on his attack on Kuwait when he thought he had okay from the US, just as Bush miscalculated when he thought he could use the okay given to him by the World community over Afghanistan, to attack Iraq.
The reasons for the attack to be are constantly changing, first it was linking with the Osama's gang and 9/11 then WMD's and now we are going onto disarmament after the first two failed. Disarmament of exactly what I do not know. Maybe Saddam better start manufacturing again quickly so he can how something.
The Bush Blair 'Axle of Wonk' is in serious trouble and having started with barefaced lies can only continue with them until the historians take over. War or no war, they are both politically doomed. The UN search for WMD's is a game that everybody is playing. Baghdad is playing it with the object of not being attacked, the Axle of Wonk is playing needing to make an excuse to attack and the UN is playing for mixed reasons, but mainly to stop an unprovoked attack on a Sovereign state by a man going megalo.
It will be an unnecessary war, for an unnecessary reason by an unnecessary man. I fully expect that if the disarmament angle doesn't fly for the Bush administration to announce that they are attacking Iraq because the moon is made of green cheese. The conventional US media will of course will take serious issue with this statement and question seriously the type of cheese by trotting out a lot of patriotic cheese experts, however on the substance of the moon they will not question. But I guess that is their job, to misinform the public over their butties. The press are fully aware that a man will far easier accept an implausible lie that suits his prejudices than a fact that does not.
At the beginning of this Orwellian treat last year, with the press working up to orgasm mode, and Bushman and Tony Panzi spitting hate at Iraq, I had a bet for a dollar with a workmate over lunch. I bet that Bush would not be able to attack Iraq because the world would not let him. He did not believe me. The events that have unfolded have gone my way, but I still may loose my bet as dinosaurs will be dinosaurs!
Give a moron a club and he will look around for someone to hit over the head with it.
As a citizen of the UK, self-exiled for many years in the land where the girls are so pretty they do not realise it and polar bears are said to roam the streets I cannot but look on in sadness and embarrassment at the way these two countries so close to my heart are being run by such abject fools. No good will come of it!
'Because Saddam Tried To Kill My Dad'?
Some of us who lived and served during World War II may be surprised at the exuberance seen today in the US compared to that seen in the Axis Powers: Germany, Japan and Italy, before that war. Our victory parades seen after George Bush 41 defeated Iraq, a country which one commentator noted "had a population smaller than California and a GNP smaller than Kentucky" were as exuberant as those seen when Hitler returned to Munich in triumph after defeating France. Mussolini chose France's defeat to join Hitler hoping to share in the loot expected after the victory. Japan had been under control of militarists and was set on a policy of creating an Asian empire built upon the ashes of the European colonial powers which were either occupied or reeling on the ropes and unable to defend this loss of their empires.
Hitler had come to power with about one-third the popular vote but his early victories soon gave his overwhelming support even from some former opponents. Mussolini declared war on a balcony before a cheering multitude eager to rebuild the glory of the Roman empire of Caesar. Hitler would die with a self-inflicted bullet in his head five years later; Mussolini would be hanged a short time earlier upside down from a sign over a garage in Milan with the crowds shooting his corpse and even one woman urinating on it. Japan's militarists would see their nation lie in ruins from aerial bombing so intense that many were burned to the ground by incendiaries. Several leaders would be hanged or shot by their citizens or the victors. All this can be summed up "Success has many fathers but failure is a bastard child."
Will our leaders bask in the glory of victory or will the cheering mobs turn on them when this war turns into a disaster? Can one nation successfully wage a war upon one-sixth of humanity? When will we know when victory is achieved if it possibly can be? Since the terrorists are not a nation how can we negotiate a surrender with them? And finally, what is the Exit Strategy which Gen. Colin Powell tells us is necessary when waging a war?
Making the Case For Developing Nukes!
The only thing accomplished by Bush's proclaimed policy of 'preemptive and preventive war' is to hand all nations a reason to withdraw from the nuclear nonproliferation treaty, and like North Korea (NK), develop their own nuclear deterrents. These mid-sized nations are ignoring Bush's rhetoric and instead observe his differential treatment of North Korea and Iraq. NK is being treated with respect by Bush because it has a couple of deliverable nukes; Iraq is being prepped for another flattening because they have no nuclear deterrent! The US under the unstable and dimwitted Bush can not be trusted by the international community to conduct the Super Power role with intelligent restraint. Unlike the thoroughly brainwashed US public, the world community understands the degree to which the US's power is being used by the Zionists as a hammer against Islam. Since there are at least 60 nations with sizable Muslim populations, it is conceivable that Bush will be maneuvered by the Jewish/Christian Right communities into confronting each of the larger Muslim nations one by one. With the help of the same communities, Bush is assured of a second term during which he may continue to act as Israel's cat's paw. ...
~ Neil R. Huff, Boulder City, Nevada
Submit an Antiwar Poem
In the ongoing effort to oppose the War, please visit this link and submit a poem for the First Lady's White House poetry reading on February 12th:
http://www.PoetsAgainstTheWar.org/submit.htm
Here’s mine, "Winged Hope":
My sweet child, blue-eyed, stares up in wonder
Cloud-bloomed sky swims in her gaze; she giggles
her tiny fingers clutch mine.
She is beauty incarnate, fragility embodied
Across the globe, Pentagon plots;
Pushes policies, purifies plutonium
heavy-headed, heavy-hearted, heavy-handed
My heart clenches, fearing numberless perils
I cannot shield her from what may come
Though I would die for her,
Her new life's a butterfly
Winging toward the coming maelstrom
Blix Report
A New York Times headline at the end of the week stated that Hans Blix complained that the United States authorities had "misquoted" his report to the Security Council on Iraqi compliance with his inspections. "Misquoted" is a vapid and wholly inadequate description of what followed in the story in which Mr. Blix laid out a succession of lies concocted and recycled by the Bush propaganda machine. The damage, of course, had already been done. The Bush spin on Blix's attempt to present a believable report that would at the same time placate the War Party was already the conventional wisdom, fulfilling Mark Twain's musings on the speed of a lie while truth is still trying to get its boots on.
My point in writing, however, is to share with Antiwar.com the results of an internet search which I did after reading the text of the Blix talk to the UNSC. He complains not of hideous weapons found, but of the absence of documents that would prove the nonexistence or the past destruction of weapons that may or may not have existed except in the febrile calculations of the various experts that are trotted out to make these arithmetical justifications for war. Blix mentioned the anomaly of some 6,500 warheads that cannot be found, not even with the kick-in-the-door powers now granted UNMOVIC, but were produced – he says – sometime during an 18 year period starting in the 1980s.
My search for citations of lost, mislaid, misplaced, lost-track-of, and can't-be-found items led to the discovery that that Pentagon has mislaid 250,000 defective suits meant to protect soldiers against biological and chemical weapons, and "all full copies of the chemical warfare logs maintained by the military during the 1991 Persian Gulf war had disappeared, even though copies on paper and on computer disks had been stored after the war in locked safes at two different locations in the United States." Also gone astray, say Pentagon accountants, are "a destroyer, several tanks and armored personnel carriers, hundreds of machine guns, rounds of ammo, grenade launchers and some surface-to-air missiles." These latter are missing on paper. Graver by far is the report that a number of nuclear weapons have been lost, one of them remaining in the Savannah River of South Carolina. I have not had the time to do follow-ups on these reports and the many others I found effortlessly, but most are recent, so they probably are valid to the extent that they are undenied reports of official statements. I list a few websites below.
To mention
but a few: http://www.downwinders.org/Dakota.htm
http://216.26.163.62/2002/ss_military_10_21.html
http://www.radix.net/~jcturner/clips/0228-nyt.htm
http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0006/15/i_ins.00.html
http://www.commondreams.org/views01/0803-08.htm
http://www.iaea.or.at/worldatom/Press/P_release/2002/prn0209.shtml
http://www.didyouknow.cd/nuclear.htm
http://www.newsfactor.com/perl/story/18889.html
http://www.converge.org.nz/pma/scoun.htm.
The thing is, all kinds of stuff goes missing because human beings are lazy, inattentive, bad at math, or are being bombed. The latter is Iraq's excuse for not making its numbers add up. In the event of Mr. Blix's inability to find any actual weapons that could explode or infect or asphyxiate me, I am willing to forgive Iraq's arithmetic.
~ Alan Bickley, Dhaka, Bangladesh
Regarding "Balkanizing the World" by Nebojsa Malic:
OK, I am a believer! But why was it done? Who made money?
Nebojsa Malic replies:
Directly? From the bottom up: local thugs and Mafiosi; local politicians; colonial administrators and 'NGO' organizers; military suppliers and contractors; Imperial politicians (in terms of power, influence and new taxes, not 'profit' as that category is meaningless in government terms). But more than money, they all sought – and got – power.
Regarding "Israel's Amen Corner" by Justin Raimondo:
May I commend you on your fearless truth-telling. It seems the Zionist connection has become a taboo subject in America – and is shouted down as 'anti-Semitism.' This taboo needs to be bust wide open in order for democratic debate to take place. Your writings make an invaluable contribution to this debate. South Africans who lived through apartheid, which was rationalised with passages from the Bible thumped by the Afrikaner Christian Nationalist Party, have seen it before and cannot be fooled.
~ Margaret Vidal, Johannesburg, South Africa
Regarding "Slouching into Iraq?" by Alan Bock:
At first we thought UN weapons inspectors would need a couple of months to get the goods on Saddam. So far they haven't found anything substantial . (Did we really expect to find anything when he opened the door and said OK?)
Now the inspectors say they need another year. I say give it to 'em. Towards the end of that year they'll ask for 5 more. Sure. Why not? Go ahead! As long as there are hundreds of inspectors zooming around in helicopters, Saddam can't be actively doing any weapons development. It is tempting logic, but:
The trouble with this scenario is that eventually the inspectors will get complacent. The UN's attention will be drawn to something else. The number of inspectors will be chopped substantially. Gradually, restraints will be placed upon the free hands of the inspectors. Saddam will lobby world opinion to withdraw his palaces from the list of places the inspectors can visit. He will say "I told you you would find nothing – now give me back my privacy." The world will listen and sympathize with this logic. Then Saddam goes back to whatever evil plans he put on hold in 2001.
I have to believe that US intelligence knows for certain what Saddam has and where he is hiding it. We can't give that information to the inspectors because Saddam will move it once he realizes we know where it is. As it stands, he thinks we are bluffing. Fine, let him think that.
In hindsight, we made a couple of mistakes: 1) by seeking UN approval of our policies, and 2) by allowing the UN to organize and carry out the inspections on our behalf using only their own resources. Let's not propagate the errors by naively continuing to beg the UN to favor US interests.
Regarding "Puerto Rico Libre – and Good Riddance" by George Szamuely:
I am a white Puerto Rican woman. I read the article "Puerto Rico Libre – and Good Riddance" by George Szamuely. I believe Szamuely wants to be Spanish. He hates Spain because Spain is better than him. He is full of envy. I like United States and I like the Americans. Americans are nice and intelligent people, but Szamuely is a silly American. I think Szamuely has resentment against Spain, because he knows that all the Puerto Ricans and Cubans admire the great Spain. The Spanish empire is something impressive and extraordinary. Even more, the Spaniards and Cubans helped the Americans in the war of the independence of Unites States. Szamuely has to be more grateful with the people that liberated his country.
I'm Puerto Rican, I'm Spanish, I like United States but I don't have to love United States because United States is not my country. Szamuely has to know that the majority of the Puerto Ricans of high class prefer a Puerto Rico libre to a North American Puerto Rico. A Puerto Rico libre will be strong and powerful. Remember, Szamuely, first there was a great New Spain in the United States and the United States will be in the future be part of Latin America. The Spanish world is shining more than ever. Szamuely, the resentment hurts and it is not good for your health and for the peace of the world.
Regarding "Israel, American Jews, and the War on Iraq" by Bill and Kathleen Christison (CounterPunch):
I am writing to comment on your article posted on Antiwar and in Counter Punch. In that article you purport to know the facts about the Jewish influence over the White House and the decision to go to war with Iraq. You also seem to be fixated on the plight of the Palestinian people. You consider them displaced people whose homeland was stolen from them. I take issue with with your canards for the following reasons:
1. The overthrow of Saddam Hussein is backed by the Kurds and the Shia of Southern Iraq. The Shia are backed by Iran. Iran is letting anti-Saddam planning occur in its territory. Kuwait is very happy to see Saddam go. In fact land prices on the Kuwaiti border with Iraq are skyrocketing. It is true that Syria maintains a similar Batthasist regime as Iraqis but is no natural ally either. The reality of the modern mid east, is that it is creation of British imperialism with no natural borders. Every single country owes its naming and borders to Britain or France except Palestine. It owes its name to the Romans. They named it that after they had kicked out the remaining Jews in the southern Kingdom. Previously an area much bigger then modern day Israel was made up of two Israelite kingdoms, north and south. The northern kingdom was over thrown by the Greek Assyrians and the Israeli tribes were kicked out many hundreds of years before the Romans had their turn at the southern Israelites.
In any case what we now call Iraq has had changing borders for thousands of years and was once called Babylon. It has seen its share of dictators, Nebcanezzar and foreign invaders and overlords. The middle east is not just Jews and Arabs. In fact Iraq is made up of Kurds, Turkmen's, Marsh Arabs or Shia, and traditional Arabs who are more likely related to the Hashemites in Jordan. Jordan is mostly Palestinian but that name too is a misnomer. Palestinians are not a homogenous group. They are made up of Arabs from other areas, Turks left over from Ottoman rule and believe it or not a large clan of ex-European Christian crusaders. The original people that we can attribute the name Palestine to were the Philistines. They were a sea faring people most likely of Greek origin. They probably are not related to the majority of modern Palestinians. Some of these people want to see Saddam go. We support them because of ideology not their religious affiliation. That's what America does; It supports countries of similar ideology and sometimes countries that share our enemies. Israel is one that shares our ideology and enemies. ...
2. Countries and borders are manmade. For the most part they are set up to protect one people from another. This was originally tribal but then came to rest on philosophies and race. The more race has played a part in nation building the more trouble we have seen as humans. In the case of Israel, the Jews needed a country of their own because good Europeans with names like yours were always trying to kill them. I do wonder sometimes if the independent Jewish region set up in the former Soviet region would have been better but alas the Jews have an ancestral attachment to what is now Israel. That is much more then we as Americans have to this country. You must be of Scandinavian or German ancestry. You moved here like the Jews are moving to Israel. You probably live on ancestral Indian grounds. The Indians came here from somewhere else as well. Yet now we all live in country based on an ideology. We are all Americans no matter where we came from. The American Indians are not blowing up our children with theirs, to try and make us go back to our places of origin. They accept that change has created a nation that encompasses their nation. Part of that change was the taking of their land by our ancestors.
The Israelis have agreed with the UN and the original Balfour declaration that Historic Israel should have been partitioned as a way of solving the "Two Peoples" for one land issue. The Arabs had a real hard time with this. In the 1940s many countries were created. One of them could have been Palestine. Instead of the creation of their own independent state, the Arabs focused only on finishing Hitler's job. They lost. Now the poor Palestinians are losing again as they are led by inept leaders who callously blow up their own children just to kill Jews. ...
~ Kalmen Selfors, Santa Barbara, California
Regarding J. Neil Schulman's letter posted January 31:
J. Neil Schulman thinks Scott Ritter is being blackmailed by a foreign intelligence service. Obviously he hasn't heard Mr. Ritter speak. I have several times (from early 2001 and no he wasn't in agreement with the Bush administration). He challenges his audiences. Tells them they shouldn't accept what he says just because he says it. They should read, think, educate themselves. Be Americans in the best sense of the word.
My take on what is happening in our area is that the Daily Gazette, the Albany District Attorney and possibly the FBI are in collusion. My husband, however, says the Gazette just wanted to increase its circulation.
Jesus said "Let those without sin cast the first stone." In today's America it seems a crowd would step forward.
~ Teresa Finley