I only yesterday discovered salon.com after DSL service recently reached my rural home address. As a result, after years of personal discouragement about the American public's seeming indifference to human rights violations encouraged and facilitated by the Bush administration, it is heartening to read the near unanimous voice of salon.com letter writers who share my disdain, shame, and indignation about the Bush administration's deplorable actions in this regard.

I don't have much hope that more truth will be revealed, much less that accountability will be realized. I am waiting with interest to see how the Obama administration prioritizes the needed corrective actions.

Thank you all for renewing some faith in Americans. If positive changes are ever actually made, faith will be greatly solidified.

Is it mostly Bush’s fault? Is it mostly Clinton’s fault? While I agree that Bush is an idiot, and Clinton is dishonest, since there seems to be plenty of good arguments in support of blame for any political leader we want to pick, let’s step back and consider that perhaps the root cause of the problem isn’t the personality at the top. Perhaps the root cause is the political system itself. It sure seems to me that most politicians now base their “leadership” decisions on a combination of the following three things: (1.) What will most likely garner them reelection or campaign contributions. (2.) What will garner them personal power. (3.) What will garner them personal wealth. These politicians most all abdicate responsibility to constituents in favor of personal benefit. We have allowed this to happen because we allow and encourage professional politicians in support of the mistaken notion that we are best off with a professional in office to represent us. D, or R, or I, or L, it doesn’t matter. We don’t need professional politicians. We need amateur politicians. We need politicians that we all face the near term reality of returning to live and work along side members of their community. I am pretty sure that a system that incorporates a one term limit on every elected office would go a long way in correcting the root cause problem.

"The three trillion number, does that account for the gross cost of warfare or the net. All those deployed would be pulling a paycheck just being on active duty here in the 'safe' confines of the USA. i safely assume they would have been training here at home for future battlefield excursions, using ammunition, fuel, etc.., is that money deducted from the 3 trillion? It was going to be spent either way, here or in Iraq."

Are you really that anxious to be an apoligst for the war? The bulk of it is NOT money that was going to be spent if the troops stayed in garrison. And that three trillion accounts for little of the cost to rebuild the property damage done in Iraq. Do we need to even mention that it doesn't attach a dollar value to the human (American and Iraqi) cost, other than a little (compared to the real cost) for VA hospitals?

And fear mongering?? The whole justification for the war was the basis of something we told we should FEAR was going to happen if Saddam wasn't removed. It was immoral to invade another country on the basis of what we FEARED might happen, and to use as justification our indignation that stemmed from the unwillingness of the U.N. to take stronger action.

"Why is It U.s. ctizen NEVER cared a hoot all the terrorist attacks against middle east populations where THOUSANDS up THOUSANDS have been killed over the decades, but when they hit the U.S.and killed UNDER 3,000 people, the Bush administration went into a frenzy of 'terrorism' and fanned it's flames? More people are killed every day in auto accidents that terrorists attacks. That attack had NOTHING to do with Iraq. The Bush administration used it as an excuse to attack Iraq."

Amen, brother.

And because our politicians have well learned that the sheep will accept almost anything as long as they can evoke sufficient fear by declaring a war on it, whether a war on drugs, a war on poverty, a war on illiteracy, or a war on terror. And because the puppeteers pulling Bush's strings wanted to garner favor and wealth for their M-I complex selves and cronies, and oil business selves and cronies.

MIchael Jackson's death is as tragic as any average death. But it is NOT nearly as tragic as the death of a few dozen Afghani civilians who died as a result of wayward U.S. bombs. Or Iraqi civilians who died at the hands of criminal Blackwater security. Where was your hand wringing and your concern over that?

You people who wail and moan and wring your hands over Jackson's death have one screwed up set of priorities (as do most Americans who anguish over this, it seems). And I don't say this because he was a black wierdo. Your priorities would be just as screwed up if you were anguishing over the death of John Wayne, or Elvis Presley, or Gerorge Bush, or Barack Obama.

None of us are any better than another. None of us are more valuable than any other.

Most of you demonstrate that you are warped, and haven't had an original thought, or drawn a careful conclusion in your life.

He did what?? He wrote Pop Music?? You really think that was a great contribution to humanity??