|
|||||||||
Posted May 26, 2001
Reasons for Secrecy
…Fifty or sixty years ago, before the advent of television, keeping things from public knowledge was a much easier task than it is today. For example, shortly after the bombing of Pearl Harbor in 1941, it was discovered that top American officials, including the President, actually knew about the attack in advance. This revelation was discussed soon after the bombing, but as the years have gone by, this reality has had no real affect upon the documentation and historical impact of the event. In fact, most Americans have taken the myth to be fact, assuming that the massacre at Pearl Harbor was a "surprise attack."
We've all seen bits and pieces of the famous newsreels of the 1940's, depicting the heroic efforts of our young soldiers, as if none of them were being lost in battle. American hardships, casualties, and the tears of those left behind were kept out of the public eye, resulting in an inaccurate, glorified view of the harsh, terrible reality. Especially war times gone by, our government has kept a lot of information from reaching the public. As citizens, we are most likely correct in assuming that a certain percentage of this secrecy is merely to cover up the mistakes, bad judgments, and even crimes of high-ranking military and government officials.
~ Sgt. Tom Adams, Disabled World War II American Veteran
Britain, Grain and the EU
…[Britain's] geographical position, as a densely populated island nation, not well adapted to producing cereals, exposed to the wet Westerlies and the cloud cover they bring, at the same time as our position at the crossroads of the world's sea routes, favours us as a maritime nation and requires special policies which have been successfully applied since the mid-18th century until our suicidal involvement with the "Common Market" (as it was called then). These policies were complementary to those of North America, as efficient producers of grains for human and animal consumption, which, with similar imports from Australia, provided the basis for British livestock farming.
I think that it can only be beneficial to promote understanding among civilised people on both sides of the Atlantic in defence of those libertarian principles we share, as opposed to the totalitarian Napoleonic concept that the citizen may enjoy only those "rights" which the Almighty State grants him, and which, in the words of the European Union's Declaration of Human Rights, may be withdrawn at any time.
~ Eric Clements
Japan: Not Helpless Victim
While I have been an avid reader of Justin Raimondo's columns for quite a while, one thing I have always been puzzled by is his obsession with Japan. He seems positively giddy over resurging Japanese nationalism, something that gives the rest of Asia cause for concern. Well, I am puzzled no longer – at least part of the reason for his pro-Japanese enthusiasm can be found in the first paragraph of his May 23 column. Personally, I have trouble viewing Japan as a helpless victim of U.S. imperialism, especially when they themselves are guilty of some of the worst imperialism this century. Of course, I am not exactly unbiased either, as my mother's family is from Korea. Some members of my family are old enough to remember the occupation, and could probably tell Justin a thing or two about the Japanese. It would be interesting to poll Koreans and asked them if given a choice, which would they prefer on their soil – 38,000 U.S. troops or 38,000 Japanese troops. I guarantee you that they would prefer the former by a large margin.
~ John Martin