| |||||||||
Posted December 12, 2001
Luxurious Cave
Love your site, it's ... the only one I find has the real news.
...I do not support him, and feel Osama is another sick, twisted human who makes a good argument for either smaller families or abortion. Yet Last night I heard Cheney say on TV that Osama was perfectly willing to send young men off to die in his fight against the US, yet hid out in caves to save his own life. I can't help thinking that in fact our own president hid out in his own luxurious cave while the poorer sections of our society went off to fight in Vietnam. I am not sure if Bush senior supported the war in Vietnam while finding an out for his own son or not, but I would suspect he did from his views. If so, then how can the current Bush justify his ease in making decisions that cause the death of young men now in his war. Don't all or most leaders avoid being in a war directly while at the same time supporting them when they are not directly involved? It just seems like some of us are meant to die for the ideas of others, while they usually go on to live long full lives.
Borders
Justin Raimondo remarks in his column [of December 7], "Fear Has Its Uses," that the real danger to the American people is at home and that U.S. soldiers should be brought back from Afghanistan in order to meet this threat. But exactly how is our military supposed to police covert terrorist cells in our nation without, in part, engaging in a war against the civilian population? These terrorists have infiltrated us, blended into our communities, and the military is trained to do one thing and one thing only – fight, kill, destroy whoever is designated the enemy. Although I agree that US soldiers should only be used to defend our borders, our borders are not being attacked by a recognizable enemy. Wouldn't using our own military to attack the enemy within result in establishing a military dictatorship far worse than the fascist measures currently being adopted by our political leaders? It seems to me that the only viable way to defend against covert terrorism within our own borders is to utilize local police departments to a greater extent over federal authorities.
~ Jennifer Gritt, The New American
PC
[Regarding Justin Raimondo's column of December 10, "The Horror of It All":]
Just a note – I think we need to rethink our use of the term "politically correct." Up until recently it seemed to refer to awkward attempts to find the nicest, least offensive description of people, movements, etc. Now it seems being "politically correct" means following the leaders like sheep. Suggesting they might be as humanly subject to failings of greed and personal ambition as Justin points out is what I think constitutes the new "political incorrectness."
Interventionist Crusades
The interventionist fails to recognize that small nations like Israel are emboldened to make war and encourage war by an American inclination towards involving themselves in the affairs of others. The interventionist policy actually serves to promote war, because small states begin to seek ways of enlarging themselves under the cover of American interventionist crusades, rather than make the necessary compromises for peace.
Sharon's view of things is rather simple. He can obtain peace by giving up land, or he can keep everything by encouraging violence and appealing to America when violence occurs. America's unconditional support of Israel has resulted in emboldening Sharon, whereas a less interventionist policy would have forced Israel to look for a peaceful conclusion to the Palestinian question.
Anarchistic Spirit
First of all, thank you for the excellent work you ... do. We have divergent political beliefs but I enjoy hearing ... [Justin Raimondo's] well-formed opinions; you destroy right-wing stereotypes enforced by cretins like Horowitz, and I hope that you see that it is no different on the left.
I was reading the link Antiwar.com offered regarding left-libertarians' distress over the hijacking of the peace movement by ISO types ["Why Did ISO Hijack Berkley [sic] CA Schools Conference?," Indymedia, November 12] – indeed I have heard grumblings about this group myself. I simply feel compelled to assure you of what you probably already understand. The ISO-types do not speak for the left, they have their own agenda. Somehow they have managed to f*ck up the burgeoning peace movement. There was a lot of good energy in those weeks after the tragedy, but we see what happens when things are organized by authoritarians. All positive momentum gets sucked up by these parasites. Gladly, in my opinion, the prevalent spirit of the coming protest movement will be anarchistic, which means it will be self-sustaining, not dependent on some Bolsheviks for approval. Damned dour apples, they already lost their f'n chance. I don't hate Marx like you do – I mean come on, at least he tried! – but the point is, yea, things are pretty sh*tty. But we will let the parasites suck their own blood.
Window Stickers
Great site! Gosh, here all along I thought killing kids in other countries was "serving"! OK, how 'bout if we make some window stickers? – www.Antiwar.com – either in diecut or let's go full-blown with red, white and blue. What do ya think?
The "Backtalk" editor replies:
Sounds good to us. Know of any good sticker-makers?
Beaten by the Police
I enjoyed ... [Justin Raimondo's] recent article ("The Horror of it All").
As glad as I am that the "war" seems to be ending well (and quickly), I fear that my fellow citizens are now more convinced than ever that: 1) US military action is invariably always right and just. 2) Civil liberties are unnecessary and potentially subversive. 3) Anyone who questions the government in these matters is at best, a coward, and at worst, a traitor. As an antiwar Republican (and former Libertarian), I have never felt so marginalized. Some of my left-wing antiwar acquaintances tried to demonstrate against the bombing of Afghanistan a few weeks ago in Hartford. They were brutalized – physically beaten without provocation – by the Hartford police. I know the route they marched. A few years ago, I walked the same path protesting the bombing of Serbia. Back then, we were met with indifference. Now, the penalty for protest is state-sanctioned physical assault. I am pleased to continue to contribute to Antiwar.com, although I have given up writing, speaking, and demonstrating. My letters to the editor go unpublished anyway. I have two small children at home, and I can't risk their safety (or my own) any longer. Besides, the public is now so bloodthirsty and enamored of state power that I no longer believe my words will have any impact. It appears that a new age is upon us, an explicit age of empire. I would hate to be accused of paranoia, but it is not hard to imagine a future when the blacklisted are denied employment, travel, and other basic freedoms by some "Megan's Law" database of dissenters. Of course, we are not quite there yet, and hopefully, we never will be. Thanks for keeping the torch lit.
~ Mike S., Connecticut