Letters to the Editor
tempus
Published Letters: 446 Editor's Choice: 7
-
Questions for Dem Presidential candidates
[Read the article: What were the pre-2005 "other intelligence activities"?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]This gets right to the heart of a set of questions I want answered from each of the Democratic Presidential candidates. My questions are (if anyone is ever in a position to actually ask the candidates these questions, please feel free to use them):
Do you believe that it is legitimate use of the classification system to hide illegal or unethical activities by the government? Do you believe it is appropriate use of the classification system to hide embarrassing actions by the government? Will you pledge, right now, to the American people to run the most open and non-secretive Administration in modern American history? Would you be supportive of a blanket, moving window of declassification that declassifies ALL government documents and activities that are 20 years old or older? Would you be supportive of legislation strictly limiting what can be classified and for how long - limiting classification to current intelligence methods and sources as well as military operations and capabilities? Would you support a federal Open Meetings law similar to that enjoyed by many states that prevents the People's government from holding secret meetings involving matters of public policy? If these laws are good enough for the states, do you not agree that a similar law is good enough for the PEOPLE'S federal government too? Would you support legislation strictly outlining what can and cannot be claimed under the rubric of "executive privilege"? Can you defend why ANY policy meeting should be secret from the American people since any and all policies that are ultimately decided upon DIRECTLY impacts the lives of the American people?
That's a start. I want no more secrecy.
-
Thank you...please use them
[Read the article: What were the pre-2005 "other intelligence activities"?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]tempus --- great post
I only add an idea.
...Do you believe that it is legitimate use of the classification system to hide illegal or unethical activities by the government? Do you believe it is appropriate use of the classification system to hide embarrassing actions by the government? ...
I think that it should be considered treason (punishable by death, perhaps) for a government official to use the classification system to hide illegal, unethical, or embarrassing acts. It kills any chance at rule by 'the people' and so is treason in the most heinous way.
Please, anyone, everyone, if you get a chance to be at one of those public candidate forum "debates" and you get the chance to ask questions...PLEASE USE MY QUESTIONS! I sure as hell will if I get the chance. As a matter of fact, I have emailed Gravel with the idea that he adopt for his platform the "I pledge to operate the most open and non-secretive Administration in modern American history" because I believe he is one who would actually be willing to adopt that - irrespective as to his elective chances. If he announced this at a "debate" it would produce a stir and hopefully get the other candidates to do a "Me too! Me too!"
-
Specter schmecter
[Read the article: Giving it all away]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Arlen ain't sh*t anymore. HE doesn't get to give up anything. HE doesn't get to be willing to do diddly squat. HE gets to suck it up and live with what LEAHY and the rest of the DEMOCRATS determine is the way to go. He is blowing pointless hot air as he ALWAYS does. He is an empty suit empty of all power.
Why do people quote him? Why is he not ignored? He has no power to do anything but wipe his own butt, and that poorly.
-
If you wish to truly understand this
[Read the article: Attention Democrats: GOP fear-mongering does not work]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Then I strongly suggest you read Arther Silbur, particularly his latest at http://powerofnarrative.blogspot.com/2007/08/blinded-by-story-liberals-and.html
The reason that the Enabling Act (FISA revision) was passed was NOT due to being "tricked". It was NOT because they just didn't understand or were rushed. EVERYTHING that has happened, the Military Commissions Act, the Patriot Act, torture, rendition, the Iraq Debacle, the coming Iran debacle...all of it has and is occuring because the Dems want this every bit as much as the GOPers. They only difference between Dems and GOPers are matters of style but NOT substance. They are ALL about authoritarianism. They are ALL about corporatism. They are NOT about liberty, freedom, peace, broad prosperity.
We are getting this inflicted upon us because the Dems AND the GOP desire it equally. They are enriched while the rest of us...who gives a damn. THAT is why. They are the enemy. You make a great error by thinking that the Dems are the party of salvation. It is not. It is the party of corporatism, extraordinary rendition (Clinton started it, afterall, Bush is simply extending it to the logical conclusion), invasion, war for oil. The Dems are sneakier about it while the GOP is blatant and raging about it.
-
The bill name is so terribly wrong
[Read the article: Attention Democrats: GOP fear-mongering does not work]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I believe Feinstein said that this is only a temporary bill. I seem to remember the Patriot act was only temporary too, until they reauthorized it without the sunset clauses. Anyone doubt that this bill won't become permanent? Got to love the title too, The Protect America Act.
The correct title to this bill is the Enabling Act of 2007. The 9/11 attack was the Reichstag fire, this (coupled with the Patriot Act) is truly the Enabling Act.
-
So Warner, Levin, et al
[Read the article: Warner, Levin: "Not optimistic" on Iraq]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Did part of your whine at Iraqi politicians also include a strong recommendation that they pass the oil law ASAP? Besides "political compromises" (or included among the "compromises") did you demand that the oil law be passed so that no matter what happens that at least American oil companies will own some Iraqi oil fields? That IS the reason we went in in the first place, afterall, to get THEIR oil...