Letters posted here are associated with the following Salon Premium Member:

Jelperman

Published Letters: 92

Monday, February 23, 2009 02:29 AM

Same report: written 2000 years ago

Jesus of Nazareth executed himself after receiving minor injuries while resisting arrest, sources say. Unnamed sources close to Pontius Pilate's select commission on alleged abuses at Golgotha say the suspected insurgent, also known as Jesus Christ admitted his involvement in subversive acts. The commission was set up to look into allegations of harsh treatment that some consider to be crucifixion. According to memos written by Pilate's chief legal advisor, Jesus Christ was not actually crucified, but nail-boarded, which is not only legal, according to sources close to the investigation, but necessary for imperial security.

Similar claims of what some consider torture and execution at the hands of the Roman Army have arisen before, with allegations of scourging, beating, crucifixion and if some of the more extreme allegations are to be believed, being killed by gladiators or torn apart by wild animals for public entertainment.

In related news, a controversial new book claims that Gaius Julius Caesar was not stabbed to death by Cassius, Brutus and other senators, but rather a plot by Christianist fanatics. Numerous conspiracy theories about the death of Caesar on the Ides of March have gained popularity since the new regime of Octavian decided not to investigate the matter on the grounds that bi-partisanship with Republicans was more important for the future of the Empire. Republican senate leader Brutus welcomed Octavian's decision to ignore his base, who demanded justice for the death of Caesar...

Tuesday, February 3, 2009 02:14 PM

Can't do the time, don't do the crime.

If Pakistan rendered Obama because they have reason to believe that Obama will continue to illegally bomb in their territory with Predator drones, but gave him a full and fair trial, would you regard the practice as legitimate or as an act of war?

Can't do the time, don't do the crime.

Tuesday, February 3, 2009 04:26 AM

I would choose "B", lkonstan

The sooner the better as far as I'm concerned. No one cried in their beer when Eichmann was dragged out of his lair in South America.

Monday, January 19, 2009 10:10 PM

Re: War criminals getting off scot-free

The U.S. record is not spotless here. The U.S. let quite a few somewhat shady characters into the U.S. post-war ... and turned a blind eye to what they'd done during the war ... if they could be enlisted in the nascent battle against the Soviet Union.

Cheers,

-- Arne Langsetmo

That doesn't change the fact that a number of Japanese and German war criminals were imprisoned and/or hanged after being tried for war crimes. The easy way out would have been to let them skate and recruit them to rebuild their countries. I know I quoted Patton earlier, but he got into trouble for failure to de-Nazify the sector he was in charge of -even though all those Nazis helped Patton restore water, electricity, the postal service, etc. Eisenhower was right though: these people need to be removed from positions of power and tried and punished if possible because what they did was so vile. If the mail runs slower, tough.

Monday, January 19, 2009 03:05 PM

Another Smarmy Concern Troll

Bravo Glen - the fierce urgency of yesterday still dominates your 1960's culture war brain. We all would like to see 43 rot in hell, or at least in prison. The difference between you and the rest of us is that for the rest of us, it is way, way down on the "to do" list.

I'm glad people with your smarmy, craven attitude weren't in charge at Nuremberg. Goering & Co. would have been allowed to retire to their estates, sign book deals, rake in speaking fees and pensions, etc rather than being tried and punished.

It would have been a lot easier for the Allies to rebuild Germany and Japan if they had let the war criminals off instead of "looking to the past".

Getting healthcare reform and an economic stimulus package is way more important, and to do that, smart people know that you need to not aggravate the opposition party - whether you like it or not, their votes count too.

Republitards are going to try to block anything Obama wants to do anyway. Prosecuting war crimes won't change that. If anything, failure to prosecute will be construed (rightly) as weakness and cowardice, and they will pounce as all bullies do when they smell fear.

Maybe someday, when the economy is strong and I can get health insurance on my own (as a self-employed cancer survivor, my wife's employer is my only option), I will be able to afford myself all of the self-righteous indignation that you seem to be so full of.

General George S. Patton summed it up better than I ever could:

Watch what people are cynical about, and one can often discover what they lack.

Case in point:

You're like a progressive Bill O'Reilly. Unlike Bill, your anger may be justified and based on facts, but your tone is identical to his.

If anyone doubted that you are a smarmy concern troll, this little jab should set them straight. Someone who calls for war criminals to be prosecuted is the equivalent of someone who supports war crimes. Only in the diseased mind of the Concern Troll.

Most Active Letters Threads

561

Everybody hates mommy

We're "stroller Nazis." We're whiny "breeders." Why is there so much contempt for mothers these days?
330

The extreme secrecy of the federal courts

Judges are not only permitted, but required, to conceal anything the government declares to be secret.
304

Greg Craig and Obama's worsening civil liberties record

A new Time account of the fall of Obama's White House counsel sheds much light on rule of law issues.
215

Praying for Obama's death

Pastors are invoking Psalm 109 -- "May his days be few" -- in hopes of saving our country, and our souls
163

Explaining ClimateGate: A history of distrust

Asking researchers to delete e-mails after receiving an FOI request is never a good idea. So why did it happen?

View all »

Letters Help

Currently in Salon