Letters to the Editor
Jim White
Published Letters: 1094 Editor's Choice: 15
-
Dictatorship or failed state?
[Read the article: Various items]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]In the BBC interview, the interviewer asks Bolton whether the Iraqi people are in a worse condition now than when living under the dictatorship of Saddam. Bolton's weasley reply was something to the effect of "Well, that's your opinion", suggesting that he still clings to the fiction that the Iraqi's are indeed living under better conditions now.
Sadly, what struck me on this point is that Americans now live both under a dictatorship and in a failed state. That can be illustrated well by a quote from Bush in an AP story from Wednesday:
Speaking to reporters Wednesday during a trip to Australia, Bush restated his view that decisions about troop levels should be based on recommendations from military commanders. He noted that Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, and Ambassador Ryan Crocker would be delivering progress reports soon enough.
"Whether or not that's part of the policy I announce to the nation ... why don't we see what they say and then I'll let you know," Bush said.
Note that Bush leaves out any intervening steps between the delivery of the reports and his announcement of the policy. Where is the input from Congress? Where is the input from citizens? Despite the clear Constitutional requirement for Congress to be in charge of declaring and funding war, Bush makes it clear that the "policy" going forward will be his and his alone.
Sadly, if Congress and the American people allow this to happen, then what we have is a dictatorship in our failed state.
-
Nonsense, huh?
[Read the article: Various items]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Okay, so maybe there's a little hyperbole here in that we are not all the way to failed and a dictatorship, but we sure are a lot further down that road than our country has ever been. Show me one instance where our "government" has done anything, one thing, to curb Bush's power grab. How about yesterday's ruling on NSL's? Nope, remember the 90 day stay. Watch for an appeal to the Supreme Court getting an emergency ruling by then. As for how they will respond, does this sound familiar:
Bush's goal was to render the SC utterly irrelevant
On that score they were a smashing success. At best there are now 1.5 branches of government including a near-neutered Congress and an Executive branch that runs like the captain of the Titanic on crack.
Sounds like a functioning state with a democratically elected leader subject to checks and balances to me. You know as well as I do that our country is in dire straits. We may not have reached the point of no return yet, but it gets ever closer.
-
Karen M
[Read the article: National Review's new tough guy, Mark Hemingway]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Thanks. A final thought. Courage is neither masculine nor feminine. It is simply one of the many possible aspects of a person's character.
-
Scientician
[Read the article: Various items]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I know I'm in "extreme" mode today, but consider this:
- the repeal of the patriot act provision making United States Attorneys non-senate confirmable
Yes, one small aspect of the issue has been addressed, but no real (criminal) consequences have yet been evident in this shameful politicization of the Justice Department
- Hamdi v Rumsfeld
Guantanamo is still open with hundreds of prisoners; Padilla is convicted after being tortured.
- Alberto Gonzales is resigning as AG
There is no evidence the next AG (if one is appointed and confirmed) will be any better.
- Karl Rove is no longer in the government
Karl Rove is not in jail.
- Donald Rumsfeld is no longer SecDef
Is Gates any better? Has his name even come up anywhere in the "discussion" of policy moving forward in Iraq?
- the 24 year old turd trying to censor Phd NASA scientists is out of his job
Who takes his place, and has the policy been changed back to pre-Bush?
Okay, I'll breath now...
-
Scientician
[Read the article: Various items]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]You're right. I think the reason I'm so worked up is that my local paper has a story this morning on 21 year old from about twenty miles away who is coming home without his lower legs after being wounded in Iraq Tuesday. When that hit me along with the stories that the only thing to be decided on the "new" Iraq policy is whether to withdraw a paltry 4000 troops, I guess I had a hissy fit. As you point out, any progress we achieve is indeed important. Impatience gets in the way when that progress is so slow and small.
-
Hmmmm
[Read the article: Losing bin Laden]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]From an AP story on the new tape:
Soon after word emerged that the United States had the video, Islamic militant Web sites that usually carry statements from al-Qaeda went down and were inaccessible. The reason for the shutdown was not immediately known.
Link:http://tinyurl.com/ypmv7o
I first ran across this in the lead story on Yahoo AP news, but when I went back, this paragraph was gone. This version of the story is from Toronto's Globe and Mail.
This would be interesting for someone to follow closely. Were the sites actually taken down remotely, or was their access just disrupted? Was this done to allow the government time to assess any threat that might be in the video before it was out for wider distribution? This suggests some very interesting capabilities on the part of the government.
Early reports are now saying there isn't a specific threat leveled in the video, but that it consists of "rants" and "raves". Did government pants-wetters reveal previously unknown technology without proper justification?