Posted October 14, 2002

Congressman Rohrabacher

Regarding "House Panel Rushes to Join the (War) Party":

Read Chad Nagle's article about my opponent, Dana Rohrabacher. Please pass on to Chad that Dana refused to serve during Vietnam – he claimed he had a high school hip injury – got a 1-Y deferment, then, in 1988, fought with the Muslim Mujahideen – tough guy!

~ Gerrie Schipske

Managing editor Eric Garris replies:

Not only that, but Dana burned his draft card publicly when he was an "anarchist" in 1970.

Not Antiwar

...Although Chronicles has some good columns it is not a magazine that antiwar people can rally behind. The editor, Thomas Fleming, and his cohorts, like all good conservatives, decry government intervention in some areas, but relish it in others. They were early on strong advocates of military action in response to 9/11, giving a big boost to Bush to lash out at the Afghan countryside with its inevitable civilian casualties. They also were cheerleaders when Clinton and Reno used federal police power to raid the private residence of Marilyesis Gonzalez to snatch Elian Gonzalez. And they have been tireless promoters of high tariff, protectionist trade policies such as helped to lead the U.S. and the world into World War II.

And by the way: David Hackworth is not against war with Iraq. If anyone was listening when he popped up on Rush Limbaugh the other day: He was doing his best Bush-Limbaugh yes-man spiel about how the US had to save the world from big, bad Hussein and his WMD. He is the ultimate antiwar/pro-war chameleon.

~ Dan W.

Dream Time

...This dream of fear that has for this last half century embraced America is starting to pull our society at the seams. If "eternal" war is the answer to everything, then eternal fear will accompany it. This strategy worked well for quite a while in various regimes throughout history. Russia comes to mind. Yet while the dream is fear, not everyone is reacting to it the same.

The reactions seem to be the following:

1. Zone out, watch TV, gloss over the fear, do not deal with it.
   Net result: Ineffectuality.
2. Embrace the fear and become angry with people, ideas, or things. I am not differentiating between pro- [and] antiwar, as hate generally is nonproductive no matter how you look at it. Such people could think they are hating for all the right reasons and confuse vengeance with love.
   Net result: Increasing anger; increasing unrest.
3. Have positive future hopes, in that we have been here before, and so we will get out of this mess. Like the Haven song from the movie Nashville. "We must be doin' somthin' right to last 200 years." Such people may or may not read the news, at least it isn't quite as scary as the cold war could be.
   Net result: On the fence.
4. Positive change makers would be the last group. Perhaps the smallest group in size.
   Net result: Every small ripple in a pond can add up to one big wave.

Given that the largest groups are in the first 3 categories and want to ride that fence to keep their jobs and relations and such, where does this leave the majority of America? We are dreaming this collective dream, with much help from television. Since the three networks did not show the speech from last Monday there are some forces that do indeed want us to dream and go about our lives as if perhaps "something" is wrong, but mostly as if there is nothing wrong. Perhaps we feel as if nothing can be done and this in fact could very well be true.

...Perhaps social constructs are now too deep to stop this runaway train of constant change – the "future shock" that keeps us immobile in our own complicated lives.

To end, if you are aiming to become a post-modernist priest, please consider the constructive path.

~ D.R. Ulm, University of Akron, Ohio

After Iraq

It now seems that Mr. Bush will get his war and disarm/destroy Iraq. Who will be next? Which countries possess weapons (i.e. nuclear) of mass destruction?

A) United Kingdom – no threat here as its weapons are supplied and controlled by the USA.
B) Former Soviet states – there has been considerable US involvement in decommissioning here and it is unlikely to be a serious threat.
C) China – a growing threat indeed but too big to take on.
D) Israel – seen as part of the USA.
E) Pakistan – a threat if there is ever democratic control here.
G) India – again a serious threat but weapons systems are poor and like China it's awfully big.

That leaves just one serious contender which has a submarine launch capability, medium range missiles and a technically advanced air arm.

En garde mes amis!

~ Barry Holland, UK

Emperor Bush

We might as well start the president "Emperor Bush." Getting something as major as a war plan through Congress is obviously just a formality this day in age. It's funny nobody seems to care that Saddam Hussein has never initiated hostilities with the United States! By the Bush administration's logic, if I think a stranger walking down the street might mug me, I can simply shoot him since there was the possibility of a threat. And to think Bush calls himself a born again Christian. What pompous audacity!

You know, the sad thing is, most of the twentieth century wars wouldn't have involved us at all (or started period) if the state legislatures had retained their power to elect Senators. No way would the states willingly give the federal government so much overwhelming power. But, the direct elections of Senators in 1913 (along with the creation of the Fed and the income tax) pretty much wiped out the republic as it once was. I don't even know why they still call it the Senate. It should be called the House of Representatives II.

~ Kevin G.

King George

We might as well give up. America is done. There is no Constitution left, there is no rule of law, there is no democratic process. As one after another Congressperson laments that they don't believe in this resolution and then in the same sentence announce they will support it, the cowards one by one kneel before their Masters and relinquish their responsibility and "power," which it turns out never existed. They betrayed us, despite voicing our opposition at a reported rate of 300 to 1 against. They have ordained their King, and America ceased to be.

~ Michael Bartko

Piling on Too Late

I noticed your link this evening to the article "Hawks get defensive about avoidance of service" by [Georgie Anne] Geyer, dated October 3. This Geyer woman is no antiwar journalist nor a critical thinker of any kind. If anything, she is chiming in very, very late on the "chicken hawk" theme that others took greater personal and career risk in exposing, and in a halfhearted, watered-down fashion that will be more acceptable and less-offensive for many "middle-America" news outlets to run instead of the original from the New Hampshire Gazette (and others).

You do a disservice to more courageous journalists and wrongly burnish Geyer's reputation as a "critical journalist" by linking to her from your website. This particular article is mildly critical of pro-war, non-military-serving, "intellectual" hawks. However, on whole this is not what Geyer's career has been about. Geyer has repeatedly been accused of being an apologist for statist US foreign policy and by some, a CIA shill. At the very least, she is merely "piling on" at a point too late in the game to have made any difference or prevented Congress from endorsing this war. Some might say you are merely running planted disinformation noise. But don't take my word for Geyer's journalistic or scholarly history. Her writing, replete with convenient omission of facts, distortions and outright lies speak for themselves.

As an example, I encourage you to review her "biography" of Fidel Castro, Guerrilla Prince: The Untold Story of Fidel Castro, originally published in 1991. The book, touted as a scholarly treatise, lacks any source references (footnotes, endnotes or bibliography) for the claims Geyer makes. This book also was republished in paperback in the wake of the Elian Gonzales incident 10 years later. I had the opportunity to attend a talk given by Geyer in 1991 during her book's promotional tour (in Albany, NY) during which I challenged the authenticity of her claims and the lack of source documentation. I brought copies of Geyer's book as well as 10 other books on Castro and the early years of the Cuban revolution and regime to the presentation. I demonstrated that Geyer's was the only one such work that lacked footnotes, endnotes and a bibliography. All of the other books dedicated 30-50 notes for such documentation, or approximately 10-25% of the total page count. I pointed this out to Geyer and asked how she could expect anyone to use her book for serious scholarly work.

Geyer's response to my questions was that the source references were omitted "by the publisher due to cost considerations" but would be available by contacting the librarian at the Hoover Institute at Stanford University where her notes and source materials had been donated for curation. I followed up by requesting these materials but was informed by the Hoover Institute library that no such notes, etc. existed. The second edition of Geyer's book, published 10 years later and in paperback, also did not include these materials. Surely the reduced production cost of paperback should have allowed the inclusion of the references – but no.

A reasonable person is left to draw the conclusion that the source materials do not exist and that the book is a fabrication.

Geyer also claimed during her presentation in 1991 that Castro represented a grave danger to the United States and that his airplanes could reach and attack nuclear power plants in Florida within 10 minutes flight time from Havana. A claim not unlike President Bush's current claim that Iraq soon will possess weapons of mass destruction with which to threaten the US; neither claim backed by verifiable fact.

I just felt that you should know this history. Otherwise, your website Antiwar.com has been an invaluable resource and beacon of truth in recent months. Please keep up your good work in light of the recent failure of democracy.

~ Ted Hudacko

Editor's note:

Backtalk editor Sam Koritz is profiled in the Real World section of October's Smart Money magazine (print version only, not available online).