Letters to the Editor
George Sears
Published Letters: 30 Editor's Choice: 15
-
It's Pre Post-911
[Read the article: Ask the pilot]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I remember going to an FAA pilot seminar, around 1999. I was just having a discussion with a FSDO guy. He had a stock answer for why there was no public input to much of anything the FAA does, why there are so many rules and so little flexibility. "The terrorists won". I guess 9/11 was piling on?
I monitor the DPReview forums, which is about digital photography. There are quite a few posts regarding being 'questioned' about taking pictures, but I've never seen anyone hit the quiniella like this. The paranoia about picture taking extends beyond rad Islam. In Texas, apparently, it is illegal to take pictures for your sexual gratification. Hmmm. How do they know? What do they hook you up to, as they show you the slideshow of your snapshots? I have some bad news for the makers of beer commercials...
Layers of authority that basically have to justify their existence are not very compatible with freedom or democracy. This is really very sad. I don't feel that they have cheated me of my life. That's a little over-dramatic. It's just that none of this reflects much compassion for the average guy who does want to live his life and experience as much as he can. Legal stuff. Good stuff.
-
Watching the Dems Die
[Read the article: Out-hawking Bush on Iran]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I was watching Meet the Press. They were discussing the FISA thing, when to wiretap and with what safeguards. If we have an intelligence network, it will apparently locate threats as armed people get on or off a bus or plane or subway train. And not before.
We never know what is happening in the world, so we can only react at the very last second, apparently. The Dems who were discussing FISA simply postured. I don't know why. I don't think anyone cares that they can be "entirely for" gathering the intelligence and "entirely against" how it is gathered. Either Russert is asking the wrong questions, they are giving overly wrought answers, or both.
So now we are moving to Iran. Does it really matter what we think about Iran? If we posture that Iran is EVIL, what are the odds China will cautiously move to their side, at least shade our side? It's like Russia and Hamas. No, it's not very consistent, but you can see the outlines of the new multi-polar world. And any new "pole" is coming out of the US hide.
I once told Seib of the Wall Street Journal that the issue for the US, in Iraq, post-war, was whether we would be a Superpower in, say, 5 years. The only standard for American foreign policy is a kind of goofy Machismo. The absurdity of this is brought out the Macho Hillary. The problem with McCain is he has a monolithic view of the world, and always has. He is a little to the right of Genghis Khan.
All I see are Dems posturing from a position of weakness. Why? Basically, because they don't believe in anything. In the last election I kept asking why no one was talking about GM, because GM was/is about to disappear in a cloud of dust. Pick up Fortune magazine. You can stop with the cover, if you like. How does a Superpower not have the ability to make cars and sell them into world markets.
Both parties are lost in the dream of American Post-war dominance. We are headed for a world where power is divided a lot more ways. I don't think one of these parties even survives. I used to think the GOP was doomed, but the Dems can't break it down. They have no weapons. They never score anything but long field goals when the GOP fumbles or throw a bad pass.
It's painful watching Democrats. Very, very painful.
-
Tucker Carlson is The Weakest Link
[Read the article: Abu Ghraib and Salon]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Well, all you had to do to get me to sign on to putting up the photos was to note, in passing, that Tucker Carlson was against it. Tucker with a bludgeon? Really? Sorry I missed that. The (uncivil) Civil Wars of the Journos are not really the point. I guess the thing about a broad spectrum of media is that "someone" will publish just about anything. And then everyone can posture about how goood or evil THAT was.
I looked at the photos. To some extent, it's hard to figure out the context, what the people who are in charge 'think' they are doing. In other words, is this all that much different from American prisons? People basically say, or joke, that sexual humiliation is part of American prison life. Why would we bring something different to Iraq? I wasn't particularly shocked by any of the photos. Anyone who is may not understand war, or occupation, or the process of one group having total control over another. How could it not happen? Don't the assumptions you make to do an occupation simply lead you down this road? If we are trying to make them 'like us' does that include teaching them how to make prisons where sexual humiliation is part of the deal? Is this new? Are we throttling back from Saddam and the rape rooms? Are we teaching them to let other prisoners do the rapes? I'm... very confused.
Isn't this the colonial problem, the occupier's problem? The notion that we are so much better that we can take control, of you, lift you to our level, by sinking to these depths?