Letters to the Editor
-
Rather broad definition don't you think?
Seems like 'terrorism' is what they'd like it to mean on any given day. And not to put too fine a point on it, what's wrong with a little 'agitation'? It's not as if America has actually been imperiled since 2001 (or even on 9-11). We could easily absorb many low intensity terrorist attacks that were meant simply to get our opponents point across.
-
Incomprehensible
...is a good descriptor for the Bush doctrine. As some have pointed out, this whole affair as conceived by the "neocons" was not very well thought out. But that's to be expected when ideologues are formulating doctrine. Since facts must often take a back seat to set-in-stone beliefs, then square pegs will be shaved to fit round holes and numerous examples of this are now evident.
Ignoring the morality and wisdom behind the decision to invade Iraq for a moment, an analysis of the plan is shocking. The administration describes this as a conflict on scale with WWII, and then fires Shinseki for insisting the US have all the manpower in place to guarantee success before and AFTER the invasion. Instead, we go with armchair warrior Rumsfeld's demands that we do it using a scaled down force to show the world our capabilities. To do our part to fight terrorism in this apocalyptic war, we civilians are told to go shopping. Shouldn't we at least have had Shinseki's forces in place to fall back on in the event that our first time efforts at small scale "shock and awe" didn't go exactly as planned? When has an operation of this magnitude ever gone flawlessly on the first try? And if this is the latest war to end all wars, shouldn't we be asked to do more than to buy greater quantities of plastic crap? It's unbelievably and frustratingly incomprehensible on so many levels!
Having completed that rant, compliments to cabdriver on his comprehensive list. Also to Million-Year Picnic for his points. I would add the failure of April Gillespie, James Baker, and Bush I to deter Iraq's invasion of Kuwait when approached by Hussein about US policy regarding Iraq/Kuwait relations-whether out of naivete born of incompetence or something more nefarious- to a list of recent US policy failures.
-
Whats Next for TSA-Romove all Metal on Your Body?
Mandi Hamlin, 37, said she was trying to board a flight from Lubbock to Dallas on Feb. 24 when she was scanned by a Transportation Security Administration agent after passing through a larger metal detector without problems.
The female TSA agent used a handheld detector that beeped when it passed in front of Hamlin's chest, the Dallas-area resident said.
Hamlin said she told the woman she was wearing nipple piercings. The women then called over her male colleagues, one of whom said she would have to remove the jewelry, Hamlin said.
She was not allowed to go into a private room but was forced to strip naked behind a curtian with male TSA personnel snickering and making jokes, then forced to use a pair of pliers to painfully remove a nipple piercing. This is ridiculous. Whats next naked flights? I have metal parts in my body from surgeries. Does that mean I cannot fly because they cannot be removed? Our rights are being trampled on in the interest of National Security. This is the administrations answer for the war on Terror. That ordinary people who are not a threat in America are brutalized,humiliated publically and terrorized in America by the TSA(Tránpỏtation Sàety Adminỉstation). Bin Laden hás not bêen caught. We are not evn looking that hard for him anymore. But American's are being terrorized by those Nazis tatics from Homeland Security and the TSA.
They operate more like Hitler's infamous SS than security personnel. Terrorism has become a catch -all virus that has made America Law enforcement mad. We are all now the suspects.At both in America and abroad. We should all protest and refuse to submit to TSA. Maybe if the airlines started losing money from people refusing these tatics things would change, most likely not. All those lazy people on the Welfare roles need a job. So they work for the TSA.
William Scanlon
Ho Chi Minh City
Vietnam
-
@ gneubeck
Dear Mr. Beck:
Your version of events ignores some key factors.
First of all 9/11 was 9/11/2001. George Bush was President and he ignored intelligence about Al-Queda getting ready to attack, and totally failed in providing readiness.
Secondly, it was the power-hungry Republican Congress that was so obsessed with Bill Clinton's sex life that they complained that he was trying to change the subject when he made an attempt to bomb Bin Laden. They also focused on an impeachment process with no valid constitutional reason to do so when they should have been assisting the executive branch in stopping Bin Laden.
Thirdly, Bush, along with the famously incompetent Condoleeza Rice, ignored the Clinton plan to go after Osama Bin Laden until after the attacks of 9/11/2001. Also, remember that even though Bush was President when the investigation of the USS Cole attack was completed, he did nothing to go after Bin Laden. Just because the attack occurred shortly before he became President did not mean that he could not respond.
Also, it was Bush who allowed Bin Laden to escape in Afghanistan, and has failed to capture him even now. He also attacked the wrong country after 9/11 (Iraq), and distracted our forces from being more aggressive in their pursuit of Bin Laden. So please spare us the Republican spin.
-
When will Americans Realize,
That the War on Terror really just means the War on Whatever...?