|
|||||||||
Posted November 13, 2001
Part of the 10%
Thank you very much for the site. I am part of the 10% that do not want the war and do not support the President. I read a ten-page article a few weeks ago ... about the bad points of war and it was very well written. All of my classmates at school are all for the war and it is very hard because only about five people (including me) do not want the war. I like the news articles that you use and I enjoy reading them. I recently quoted one of them in a project for school. Keep up the good work!
The Gulf of Tonkin
I
read the story about LBJ and the
Gulf of Tonkin incident ["LBJ
tape 'confirms Vietnam war error',"
the Times of London, November
7]. I believe there were actually
two reported engagements, and
there is considerable doubt about
the second one. The first does
seemed to have happened; however,
if there is a conspiracy to hide
the truth then the government
of Vietnam must be part of it.
The reason I say this is an article
I read in the Navy magazine Proceedings
sometime during the '80s. Included
was a photograph of a military
museum in Hanoi, and in front
of the museum was a torpedo. It
contained a plaque that said this
was the type of torpedo fired
at enemy forces on whatever date
in 1964 it happened.
Sorry that my memory is so sketchy
on this. I enjoy your columns
and appreciate your efforts. It
is important that accurate information
be presented so as to avoid being
undermined.
~ Mark H.
Great P.R.
Last
March, I found
your excellent
website "accidentally
on purpose,"
thanks to Lucianne.com,
which continues
to proclaim that
any articles from
Antiwar.com "are
not welcome"
and will be "banned."
Naturally, my
own curiosity
compelled me to
go directly to
the "forbidden"
website, Antiwar.com,
and I have been
a regular reader
ever since.
Lucianne.com is
doing great PR
for you guys....
~ MPF
Did It Again
[Regarding Justin Raimondo's column of November 7, "What War Has Wrought":]
You
did
it
again!
You
hit
the
nail
directly
and
powerfully
on
the
head.
All
I
can
say
is
"amen
brother"!
Keep
up
the
good
work.
~
Gary
H.
$1,000,000,000
Yesterday, prompted by a friend's e-mail, I visited the United Nations website and read that they project up to 7.5 million Afghanis may need food to survive this winter.
Have we considered what the consequences are for the US even if nowhere near 7.5 million people die in Afghanistan? This will not only polarize every Muslim state against the US, it will also affect opinions in every country in the world. It would not surprise me if there were a worldwide boycott of the US, its currency, and its citizens.
It's been reported that it's going to cost the US $1 billion per month to wage the war in Afghanistan. We could be going into Afghanistan and spending $1 billion per month on building schools and other infrastructure; it would be far less expensive in the end than what we are doing, and would probably have better results. To bring the argument to the absurd, we would even do better to just fly over and drop $1 billion per month in $1 bills instead of the leaflets and Daisy Cutters.
Better Ways
When I listened to the news on September 11th I was just as angry as everybody else, but soon after the bombings started I began to realize that there were better ways to solve the problems of terrorism and that our attacks were and are hypocritical and ineffective. President Bush's recent campaign to try to have ever kid give one dollar to children in Afghanistan is ... hypocritical. We cannot guarantee that the children will get the money, and what will run through their heads if they get the money while Red Cross buildings they depend on for emergency supplies get bombed? I am only a high school student, but I wish there was a way that I could get my ideas to be heard and for other Americans to see past their anger and look at what we are actually doing.
ID
I enjoy Justin Raimondo's columns immensely. However, I must raise one objection to a comment he made in his generally brilliant attack on the National ID card concept in his November 7 column ["What War Has Wrought"]. Raimondo wrote: "Look, there is nothing untoward about private institutions, such as banks, requiring a photo identification."
ID is taken to open a bank account largely because of government regulations, such as "know your client rules" and for IRS tax collection purposes. It is the government that really needs to know who you are for their ever growing tracking systems. Banks and private industry in general really don't care who you are. ...Before government regulations, it was pretty easy to open an account without ID. It is remarkable that government regulations are so often instituted into law and then it becomes difficult to visualize how things could work otherwise. The bank ID situation is certainly such a situation. ID's are really something government wants for tracking purposes. A national ID card, I believe, is truly one of the greatest threats to individual liberty possible. It is a giant step towards serfdom. Only government trackers benefit from a National ID system.
~ Jack Rain