Posted April 3, 2003

Accuse Eric

Y'all are just a bunch of Bush-bashing liberals. You are against helping a suppressed people but yet you are pro-choice and kill innocent babies – get a life in another country if you don't like it here. You should be supporting our troops AND OUR PRESIDENT. Treason should be punishable by death during war times – traders

~ Virginia Ansley, ticked off mom of 3 and wife of military pilot

Managing editor Eric Garris replies:

First, I have been a Republican for 20 years.

Second, this is no more treason than when Congressman Abraham Lincoln led the Antiwar Movement during the Mexican War. Like Lincoln, we call for supporting our troops by bringing them home safely.

Our founding fathers said that opponents of the government must be vigilant, even during wartime. We must not adopt the domestic principles of the enemy we are fighting. Free speech is treason in Iraq, not America.

You link and give credibility to a number of stories on your website from the Iraqi news agency. Truth means nothing to them and it apparently means nothing to you either. I'm sure you would have been linking to Joseph Goebbels' "news" during WWII, if you would have had the chance. Thanks for helping define the "antiwar" movement.

~ Saxe S.

Eric Garris replies:

We do not have a single link to an Iraqi News Agency story, unless they are being quoted by a major media source. Where do you see such links?

I've been a dedicated reader of your website since the recent war started. But I've noticed your website has taken a wrong turn somewhere. Where are the frequent updates?! Many times I log onto your site numerous times during the day only to find that sometimes you're a day late in the news. I respect and appreciate your site, but its time to get on the ball and start updating more frequently.

~ N.C., dedicated reader

Managing editor Eric Garris replies:

We have been updating about 20 times a day. It sounds like your browser is caching older pages. You need to change your settings and clear your cache.

I was told today that Texas under post-Civil War Agreement has the right and option to withdraw from the Union by simple majority. Can you please confirm or deny...?

~ Nick J.

Eric Garris replies:

My understanding is that this agreement was made pre-Civil War, when they entered the Union. The argument is whether the Civil War "settled" the issue of secession, as most Unionists contend. California used to have a similar clause, but it was repealed by an uninformed electorate in 1972 in a Constitutional "cleanup" measure on the ballot.

I have just sent you $50 in response to another request. You guys are doing great work. Question: who are the hackers and what is their aim?

~ Peter B.

Eric Garris replies:

Thank you. We don't know who the hackers are, it is usually too expensive to try to track them down. We get hundreds of hack attempts per day, but most are pretty amateur and are totally ineffective.

Why is the life of the man killed at the checkpoint of less value than those of his female companions?

~ Sasca P.

Eric Garris replies:

It is not. The story is about two shootings, not a man with companions. The other story, about the killing of 7 (actually 10, according to the Washington Post), is our #3 story on the top of our page. The Reuters story apparently got amended to combine both. I have now changed the link to reflect that.

Thank you for alerting me to this.

Regarding "Neither Left-Wing Lunatics Nor Frothing Anti-Americans" by Stephen Choy:

I, too, am one of those who initially supported GW Bush. I never, however, supported any kind of preemptive INVASION of Iraq. I agree that it is a good thing to have Antiwar.com to refer to for some 'other' opinions. Daniel Ellsberg in a debate with Bill Kristol on C-Span last week made mention of Antiwar.com – I'm glad I found it.

~ Alma Jurgensen

I was rather amused at this writer's epiphany. He keeps on about "left-wing anti-Americanism" – what is this? It is sad but true – so many on the rightwing worship class hierarchies and military power. Indeed, if we were attacked by an overwhelming power (say China in 30 years) these worshipers of might and arms would be there in the streets to greet the victorious invading army. Some would even have their young daughters with them, to offer them up to the triumphant victors. Patriotism is indeed the last bastion of the scoundrel.

Count me with the anarchists and communists that nobly defended Europe while the right-wingers were having tea with Mussolini, and giving their sons and daughters over to the new fascist state. Call me anti-American? Go ahead, from the obedient corporate slaves and warmongering rightwing, I take such an appellation as a compliment.

~ Steven Hunt

"...Despite my support for the American government, I could not provide a perfectly legitimate defense of why we were so hell-bent on going to war. I was determined to find pro-war arguments..."

It would seem to me that pro-war arguments that provide a legitimate defense for going to war should rationally precede one's support for a war. Thus I wonder to what extent is knee-jerk anti-"knee-jerk anti-Americanism" a source of support for this war?

~ Stephen Campbell

Stephen Choy replies:

"Thus I wonder to what extent is knee-jerk anti-'knee-jerk anti-Americanism' a source of support for this war?"

More than you think Stephen. Unfortunately, many American conservatives (or those who supposedly purport to be "right-wing" or "conservative") are prone to fits of pro-American nationalism. This reactionary pro-American nationalism is not just solely based in the U.S. but widespread among other right-wingers/neocons in other nations who slavishly view all things American as "superior" to other nations/cultures. Take a look at the pro-war rallies held in my own home country of Canada to see how widespread this phenomenon really is.

This nationalistic sentiment was a reaction to the perceived "zealous anti-American" left-wing criticism of American policy which essentially blamed the world's woes on the United States. Although this assessment doesn't seem to be very widespread in the world, the pro-American nationalists inaccurately perceive this anti-American sentiment to be a global phenomenon.

This "unfair persecution" complex leads many so-called right-wingers to abandon all logic and rationality in order to defend the US or their idealistic vision of the US Thus, criticism by foreign nations are often confused by the nationalists as anti-Americanism. In addition, it is intellectually easier and more "morally clarifying" for the pro-war camp to vilify and stereotype rather than confront the uncomfortable details and facts in the opposing argument.

Amen from an infantry veteran: First Division out of Dian, RVN. The bastards collapsed in the rear when we fought communists. Now, it's great guns: here's a conservative part of the world we can destroy. It's really an extension of the same Godless Materialism.

~ SI

Amen – a staunch antiwar pacifist-I was bordering despair and then I discovered Antiwar.com – thanks – yes and I will also send a check.

~ Member S.

I really agree with your article. I'm Canadian, not anti-American. I am antiwar.

I really feel that Canada is getting a lot of grief for not going to war alongside the states. It doesn't mean we are against the states just because we don't want to see people die. I'm proud of our Prime Minister.

~ Tanya (New Brunswick, Canada)

Whether intentional or not (I suspect intentional) the administration has built up its "case" for invasion of Iraq on the unfounded notion that Saddam Hussein and Osama worked in tandem to produce 9/11. This is their ace in the hole. As long as that irrational concept has essence in the brains of the public, antiwar."protesters" are going to look like kooks, no matter how well-founded their intentions are.

However, just like the Tonkin Gulf red herring, this one will decay with time. Some half-intelligent types might ask why no documentation has been produced to support this theory. Even more telling is the lack of evidence (so far at least) of stockpiles of nerve gas, anthrax spores or atomic bombs in Iraq. In fact, there seems to be no lack of deception practiced by the administration, and no lack of finger-pointing within. Of course, should morale slip, it will be the protesters' fault, but by then doubts will be so rife that even Jane Fonda's second coming can't rescue that excuse. It is downhill all the way for the war nuts. The bloody flag of 9-11, exploited so long and so shamelessly, will rouse the public less and less.

~ Leona Marti

The Neoconservatives, who pushed their 12 year vision into reality, must pay not profit from this war. The entire DPB needs to be under investigation by our Congress. I am relieved that some Republicans are starting to wake up to what the Neoconservatives is about. Like most zealots, the Neocons overestimated their strengths and underestimated the common sense of the American public.

~ Gale Wheat, Palm Springs, California

The American Dream

you guys should be tried for treason yes that's right you guys are traitors to this nation don't you see that we are doing good for Iraq during this war or are you just as blind as his military you guys need to be taken out back and shot stand up for your country stand behind your president that you elected stand up for Iraqi freedom from oppression and tyranny if the US Britain and Australia weren't doing this Saddam would be free to continue to torture his people please stop protesting I hate war too but I support this campaign and I support president bush I support the troops I think that we are doing this for a just cause you guys are only hindering when you protest you guys are traitors to the American dream that we are trying to spread to other nations you should be tried as traitors because you are traitors to the American dream

~ Nathan Ewell

Regarding "Liberate the Vatican!" by Matthew Barganier:

While I understand your article is satirical – and it is quite good ("reverse crusade" and such) – I noticed that you have singled out the Poles as the only nationality to be degraded in linguistic form – "Why is the world drowning in Polacks?"

There is no reason to expect this to be any funnier than other stereotypes. And in my mind it reminds me of right-wing pundits who make derogatory comments about the French. Welcome to the club.

It says here also – "Matt Barganier works for an educational philanthropy in Baton Rouge, LA. A late bloomer in his mid-twenties, he has only recently joined the ranks of web punditry. He is an alumnus of Louisiana State University and the University of Alabama" – signifying you are new to punditry. Perhaps some day you will find to use satire without perpetuating hateful stereotypes.

~ David Michalski

Matthew Barganier replies:

I am deeply sorry that your years spent among the perpetually offended have dulled your critical faculties. The essay is obviously written from the invented point of view of a Catholic basher and all-around militarist. I "singled out Poles" because John Paul II is Polish, and the current atmosphere of chauvinism – in which the French and Germans are the main targets – would likely extend to them in the event of a Vatican invasion. Absurd stereotypes, such as those about French effeminacy and German venality, would also be revived for the purposes of such a conflict. Again, please accept my sincere apologies for any pain my essay may have caused you. And try reading a book – it might get the blood flowing to your cerebrum again.

As a liberated – er – displaced 'mick,' all I can say is "very funny." Wicked satire, but way too close to the truth, for comfort.

~ Malcolm G. Ratcliffe, a 'paddy' from a colony

Regarding "If This Be Treason" by Justin Raimondo:

...Information coming from Tariq Aziz, Naji Sabri et al. has almost uniformly proven correct, not "propaganda." PERHAPS they are exaggerating the number of planes downed, tanks put out of commission, etc., or PERHAPS they are TELLING THE TRUTH and the US is concealing losses and the truth will come out later. Which would you put your money on?

As an example, why do give any credence whatsoever, even by repeating Shafer's claim, to the assertion that the use of cluster bombs has been "refuted by NBC's Pentagon reporter." How on earth could that even be possible? The only source of information a Pentagon reporter has is the Pentagon, and surely they can't be trusted to tell the truth. Only multiple reporters on the ground in Iraq, "embedded" with the Iraqis, could possibly verify the truth or falsehood of that claim. One thing we know for an absolute fact is that cluster bombs were used in both Yugoslavia and Afghanistan. Is it really credible that they are NOT being used in Iraq? Of course not.

~ Elisha Stephens

Regarding "US soldiers in Iraq asked to pray for Bush" (ABC News):

According to a recent ABC News article posted on Antiwar.com, American Marines are being asked to perform a "Christian's Duty" with such inspired guidance as "Pray that the President and his advisers will seek God and his wisdom daily and not rely on their own understanding".

To this I respond with a quote from Kurt Vonnegut's Mother Night.

"There are plenty of good reasons for fighting, ... but no good reason ever to hate without reservation, to imagine that God Almighty Himself hates with you, too. Where's evil? It's that large part of every man that wants to hate without limit, that wants to hate with God on its side. It's that part of every man that finds all kinds of ugliness so attractive. It's that part of an imbecile ... that punishes and vilifies and makes war gladly."

~ George Polak

Regarding "On the Middle East Escalator" by Justin Raimondo:

May you never cease to write. May you keep telling the truth even if no one else does. You are truly an invigorating light in a depressingly statist TV-addicted swamp of the mind-f**ked. Your writing gives me more hope than anything else I read these days.

There is a lot to be angry about. Please try to stay happy and healthy. Quit smoking. It looks like we're going to need people like you around for a few more decades.

Whenever I start to feel depressed, like I'm the only one who sees how this country, our liberty, and our security are being thrashed by the neocon-artists, all I have to do is go to antiwar.com and read something (anything) you've written lately. Then I know I'm not alone.

~ Rod Miller-Boyer

I think it's not too soon to ask what the response and the attitude ought to be from the Antiwar movement, and from all persons of conscience here and abroad, if it comes to pass that, when this war is over, it turns out that there were NO "weapons of mass destruction" in Iraq after all. If this indeed is what will happen, that means that the main and really the ONLY even close to valid reason espoused by the administration to attack a sovereign nation will be exposed as a sham, less than a house of cards. It will be direct and irrefutable evidence of a colossal and criminal lie by Bush and his gang. Can he be permitted to get away with it? After all those deaths, and all that destruction?

I say he cannot, but we must prepare to get things going. What is the response, the aim? To push for an indictment for war crimes and for crimes against humanity? And in what court, other than that of world public opinion? Will we be advocating only impeachment and resignation? That seems much too light an outcome.

Will it be much more gigantic protests that will finally cause the system to fall of its own rottenness? The people of eastern Europe caused the fall of criminal, outmoded and tyrannical systems there. Can't we do it here?

Already there have been inklings that American public opinion might just accept as valid some reasons for the war other than WMD, and this is very disturbing. ...

~ Sergio Reyes

Support President Bush!

I do not like the fact that we are at war, but I am a Christian and the bible says we should stand behind who we elect to run our country weather you voted for him or not. Thank God that we have a Christian president that openly claims Jesus Christ as his lord and savior!!!!! He has prayed about this and God has lead him to do what needs to be done. Saddam Hussain is a evil man that kills his own people. If something is not done about him now there is no telling what he will do to us in the future. And if you think he didn't have anything to do with 9-11 you are crazy. There wasn't one person in this country that would have been against going to war on 9 12-01, but he couldn't just go over there and start bombing away, he had to do all he could before he did that, and I believe he did do all he could. He gave Saddam Hussain every chance in the world to prevent this, but Saddam would not so he needs to be forced to.

I final, I along with other Christians believe if you do not stand behind President Bush and support him, you do not fully support the troops. There are tons of things that are going on that you don't know about and that the military and government can't tell right now for security reasons and I just think everyone should support the President! The troops have nothing but the utmost respect for the President and are fighting for your freedom and so we can live in a world free from people like Saddam Hussain. SUPPORT PRESIDENT BUSH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

~ Grace B.

Vote with Your Remote!

...Protesting is fine, but I encourage everyone to VOTE WITH YOUR REMOTE. Turn off all of the American media, do not listen to the rhetoric of the corporations, and only use the reliable resources of foreign news agencies and the Internet – which is the only truly democratic component of the media left. The American media lies, and even worse, dehumanizes our troops with its 24 hour coverage of the war. If anyone wants to be patriotic turn off the TV and actually do something for this county. And remember, the media cares more about ratings than making the Bush administration happy, so if everyone who is ant-war boycotted the media, they would probably start giving nonpartisan coverage. PEACE.

~ Jacob Schak

Step Across the Line

Society will take a while to recover from this war of choice. Our leaders have taken our country's overwhelming power which was built with the sweat of its citizens to take our country to war.

I am a survivor of the Vietnam War. Images of children with their legs blown off, bodies torn in half, the feeling of metal passing through my body, and memories of an outer body experience are still remains fresh in my mind. After going through the horrors of living life at its most primitive state I can attest to the fact that war is not the answer.

It is not being unpatriotic by disagreeing with our leaders. It is standing up for nonviolence and the only way to stop violence is to use every means to stop it. I believe this administration did not exercise all the options to prevent this war of choice and that is where Bush stepped across the line between right and wrong.

I agree with Supreme Court Justice Robert L Jackson, who was this country's representative to the International conference on Military Trials in August 1945 and the chief prosecutor at the Nuremberg war crimes trials when he said, "we must make clear to the Germans that the wrong for which their fallen leaders are on trial is not that they lost the war, but that they started it. And we must not allow ourselves to be drawn into a trial of the causes of the war, for our position is that no grievances or policies will justify resorting to aggressive war. It is utterly renounced and condemned as an instrument of policy."

Bush's actions are more dangerous to society than any depredation that Saddam has means to accomplish. I just hope that the 99% of us that are not in power will take back control of our society before we move further away from a world where there is no violence and the wealth is shared by all.

I am an author and auditor for the NJ State Treasury Department specializing in Inheritance and Estate tax. I am also a disabled Vietnam Veteran who received two Purple Hearts, a Bronzes Medal for bravery, and was awarded the New Jersey Distinguished Service Medal. I believe in our country, nonviolence, and that the wealth must be shared more evenly so that we can develop and grow as a society.

~ Bob Braun, New Jersey

Transparency

If a barrel of Iraqi oil were sold today, whose name would appear on the invoice, and into whose control would the payment of such flow?

I note that the oil, by Rumsfeld's standards, belongs to the Iraqi people. When such indeterminates are used to describe beneficiaries, I imagine, perhaps cynically, perhaps realistically, that the Trustee takes a pretty good commission before the balance of the funds flow to whomever, wherever and for whatever. Is it possible to have a full accounting of this business called Iraqi oil, the product for which the putative war was putatively never fought? The Sunnis, Kurds, Shiites, and "mestizo" Iraqis (resident or exiled) want to know.

Wouldn't the burden of proof as to the propriety (what in currency might be called "transparency") of oil transactions fall squarely on the shoulders of the spokespersons of the "liberating benefactors," who assert the want to win the hearts and minds through the stomachs and wallets of the "Iraqi people"?

~ John Flanagan, Peoria, Illinois