From:
Eric Burgess < zteecher@yahoo.com >
Date:
Tue, 18 Mar 2003 08:38:10 -0800 (PST)
Subject:
the illegal war
I
listened to Dubya (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/03/20030317-7.html)
trash the U.N. in order to justify his impending war on Iraq. After hearing the
leader of the free world say that "the United Nations Security Council has
not lived up to its responsibilities" I did some research on the U.N.
Resolutions. I included links to the sites from which I acquired the data.
Any war by the
United States against Iraq without the explicit authority from the United
Nations (ie. Security Council Resolution) is flatly illegal. Chapter VII
Article 42 of the U.N. Charter (http://www.un.org/aboutun/charter/chapter7.htm)
explains that obtaining authority for war for the Security Council is not
merely a political courtesy, but the law itself.
United
Nations Security Council Resolutions:
#660 August 2, 1990 Ð ÒDemands that Iraq withdraw immediately
and unconditionally all s its forces to the positions in which they were
located on 1 August 1990Ó
http://www.iraqwatch.org/un/unscresolutions/s-res-660.htm
#661 August
6, 1990 Ð Calls for economic sanctions on Iraq.
http://www.iraqwatch.org/un/unscresolutions/s-res-661.htm
#678 November
29, 1990 Ð ÒAuthorizes Member StatesÉto use all
necessary meansÓ to make Iraq comply withÓ Resolution 660. War against Iraq is
authorized by the U.N.
http://www.iraqwatch.org/un/unscresolutions/s-res-678.htm
#687 April
8, 1991 Ð ÒRecallsÓ or cancels U.N. Resolutions 660, 661, and 678. Calls for the Òdestruction,
removal, or rendering harmlessÓ of Ò(a) All chemical and biological weapons and
all stocks of agents and all related subsystems and components and all
research, development, support and manufacturing facilities; (b) All ballistic
missiles with a range greater than 150 kilometres and related major parts, and
repair and production facilities;Ó This clearly ends the legal use of warfare
against Iraq.
http://www.iraqwatch.org/un/unscresolutions/s-res-687.htm
#1154 March
2, 1998 Ð Threatens Iraq with Òseverest consequencesÓ
if Iraq fails Òto act in accordance with the relevant provisions of resolution
687.Ó But the Security Council retained the authority to ensure implementation,
making it the U.N.Õs decision whether to authorize force.
http://www.iraqwatch.org/un/unscresolutions/s-res-1154.htm
#1441 November
8, 2002 Ð The current U.N. weapons inspectors are to report their findings to
the Security Council. It will be up to the council, and not individual
countries, to determine what next steps might be taken regarding Iraq. There is
no authorization for war against Iraq by the U.N.
http://www.un.int/usa/sres-iraq.htm
After reading
the preamble to the U.N. Charter I think it is clear that the United Nations
has lived up to its responsibility.
United Nations Preamble
WE THE PEOPLES
OF THE UNITED NATIONS DETERMINED to save succeeding generations from the
scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to
mankind, and to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth
of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large
and small, and to establish conditions under which justice and respect for the
obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be
maintained, and to promote social progress and better standards of life in
larger freedom,
AND FOR THESE
ENDS
to practice
tolerance and live together in peace with one another as good neighbours, and
to unite our strength to maintain international peace and security, and to
ensure, by the acceptance of principles and the institution of methods, that
armed force shall not be used, save in the common interest, and to employ
international machinery for the promotion of the economic and social
advancement of all peoples,
HAVE RESOLVED TO
COMBINE OUR EFFORTS TO ACCOMPLISH THESE AIMS
Accordingly, our
respective Governments, through representatives assembled in the city of San
Francisco, who have exhibited their full powers found to be in good and due
form, have agreed to the present Charter of the United Nations and do hereby
establish an international organization to be known as the United Nations.
http://www.un.org/aboutun/charter/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 18
Mar 2003 14:56:52 -0800
Subject: Re: the
illegal war
From: ÒRichard
WintersÓ <jdrudge@earthlink.net>
ItÕs interesting
how people compare Saddam to Hitler. ItÕs also interesting that it was Germany
which didnÕt want its actions criticized or limited by the League of Nations,
and which walked out rather than submit to those limitations. It is the Bush,
not Saddam Hussein who refuses to acknowledge the authority of the world body
to which it, ostensibly, belongs.
It is also Bush
and his people who use the BIg Lie to demonize Hussein.
I would refer
you to U.S. Marine Corps Historical Document FMFRP 3-203, Appendix B. This
report was prepared by the U.S. Marine Corps in response to the deaths of Kurds
by poison gas, at Halabja< Iraq, in 1988. The report clearly lays those
deaths at the feet of the Irani forces. The gas was Cyanide, the gas of choice
for Iran, and the physical evidence showed that it had come from Irani
positions.
I have no doubt
that Saddam is not a good national leader. What concerns me more is that, in
order to cover itself with cover for its desired war, my government has had to
lead a campaign of deception, outright lies, and demonization. This follows a
precedent set by dictators, not by democrats.
Dick Winters
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: ÒTHE KIDÓ
<the-kid@sbcglobal.net>
Subject: Re: the
illegal war
Date: Thu, 20
Mar 2003 13:00:25 -0800
What the
@#!& is going on in America?
Daily I am
confronted with news of some type of idiotic behavior from my fellow citizens.
It makes me wonder what goes on in the minds of the self-loathing American
left. Were they dropped on their heads as babies?
Abused? Ate too many
lead-based paint chips? Their blatant anti-Americanism is an insult not only to
hard-working, decent folk like myself, but to the victims of 9-11.
9-11 changed
life in America on many levels, I think everyone can agree on that. ItÕs impact
touched us spiritually, socially, economically, and politically. Americans
reacted by giving President Bush a mandate: Destroy Terrorism. We went into
Afghanistan and did what the mighty Soviet Empire could not, we demolished it.
Now we rebuild it. Like him or not, President Bush has done an excellent job of
preventing further attacks on our country.
He has taken the
attack to those countries that support terrorism, starting with Afghanistan and
now Iraq. If he deems Iraq as being next on our list, then IÕm with him.
President Bush has drawn the ire of the left for being such a strong leader.
They show their own political bias when they label him as being dumb. How can
one who has become president of the most powerful nation in the world be
labeled as dumb? Personal attacks are lobbed at him daily, but he has proven to
be tough enough not to allow these attacks to deter him from his duty, to
protect our country. I would prefer to have a cowboy in the White House as
opposed to a Neville Chamberlain. You canÕt reason with terrorists, you have to
destroy them. A group that willingly murders women and children needs to
disappear. I liken President Bush to Wyatt Earp in the movie ÒTombstoneÓ. In
referring to the murderous red-sash-wearing gang called The Cowboys, Earp states
ÒIf it wears a red sash, I kill itÓ. ThatÕs the kind of leader we needed after
9-11 and President Bush has not disappointed us.
If there is one
weak spot in the war on terror, itÕs taking our case to the UN concerning Iraq.
After receiving congressional approval for action, President Bush should have
formed his own coalition to remove Saddam Hussein. Obviously hindsight is
20/20. Who knew weÕd face such opposition not only abroad, but here at home
from the very vocal far left? Cries of ÒIraq will be our next VietnamÓ have
rung partially true. The UN has proven to be the Vietnam-like quagmire we were
afraid of, not the actual liberation of Iraq. That will be a quick war. As far
as the UN is concerned, I am amazed daily to see extension of deadlines towards
Iraqi compliance with UN Resolution 1441. The UN as an international forum of
any type of significance is over. ItÕs time for the US to leave the UN.
Obviously every country represented at the UN is acting in its own
self-interest, as are we.
Those countries
that have not been attacked by terrorists donÕt have a vested interest in
removing Saddam. For the left to accuse us of bullying other countries for
support is politically naive. We were attacked, and now weÕre calling in our
IOUs. ThatÕs why President Bush went to the UN in the first place. Now weÕre
seeing who has a stomach for this fight, and who doesnÕt. I hope President Bush
will toe the line and end this farce once and for all on March 17. Iraq is not
disarming, plain and simple. To delay only invites greater chance of terrorists
gaining chemical or biological agents from Saddam to use against the US and the
West. The UN no longer serves our interests, so it is no longer relevant. To
hear these anti-war protesters, theyÕd rather we surrender our autonomy to the
UN. We should bury our heads in the sand, itÕs not our problem. How do they
come up with this stuff?
According to
WebsterÕs, sedition is defined as Òincitement of resistance to or insurrection
against lawful authorityÓ. ÒPeaceÓ protesters, and I use that term loosely, now
endorse violence in their attempt to be heard.
Anti-war groups
have desecrated a 9-11 memorial site and ransacked a convenience store, both
events occurring in California. Messages emanating from these groups are
calling for walk-outs at work and blocking traffic.
The only problem
with this strategy is that none of these people seem to have jobs. Honest,
law-abiding, gainfully-employed stiffs like myself donÕt have the luxury of
free time like these people do. After my 9 hour work day, I have chores to do
at home as well as other civic commitments. ThatÕs why you donÕt see many
Pro-USA Rallies. How can these Americans so easily forget the events of 9-11?
Why do anti-war activists claim that liberating Iraq from SaddamÕs rule will
lead to more terrorism? If this is true, then doesnÕt that confirm the fact
that Saddam and terrorism are in bed together?
How can they
argue that this is not a just war? Saddam is a supporter of terrorism, heÕs
murdered and tortured his own people, gassed the Kurds, and is therefore a
logical next target after Afghanistan in our war on terror.
Germany and
Japan became productive members of the international community after WWII.
Speaking of Nazism, the radical left continues to discredit itself when they
attempt to draw comparisons of President Bush to Hitler or desecrate our flag
with swastikas. I agree with Dennis Miller when he observed that an asskicking
is called for when you see a protesters desecrating the flag with a swastika.
Nowhere in their rhetoric is Saddam Hussein likened to Hitler. What about the
cheesy lawyer arrested recently in an Albany mall wearing a ÒPeaceÓ shirt? The
media have portrayed this as being a free speech issue, but failed to report
that the lawyer, who knew exactly what he was doing, was actually HARASSING
people, thus causing the infamous confrontation with mall security. The mall
fired the security guard because of the backlash from the ÒpeaceÓ movement.
WhatÕs wrong with that picture?
LetÕs talk
Hollywood. After 9-11, so many of the Hollywood elite jumped on the bandwagon
to raise money for the families of the victims. Where did they take a wrong
turn? We have television president Martin Sheen and movie police captain Danny
Glover virtually calling for an overthrow of the US Government. My personal
Hollywood boycott list now numbers 99 with the recent addition of musician
Chrissie Hynde and The Beastie Boys. DonÕt these people have any business sense
(Already assuming they have no moral sense)?
By speaking out
in support of the radical left, by taking up the anti-American message of the
ÒpeaceÓ groups, these entertainers have become social pariahs. By siding
against their own country, they are losing out on money and opportunities due
to the backlash they face from a very hostile public. I have already contacted
VISA and MCI to protest their use of Sheen and Glover as spokespersons for
their products, and have been informed by VISA that they will not be airing the
Sheen commercial anymore. I recently say ÒGods and GeneralsÓ at the movies and
wanted to purchase the sequel, ÒGettysburgÓ on DVD, but alas, Sheen starred as
Gen. Lee in that movie.
Guess what? No
DVD purchase for me (Robert Duvall played Lee in G&G, so no violation of my
own boycott).
IÕm going to
wrap this up with some other observations of things that have been bothering
me. Where does the Pope get off criticizing the US? Like he has any credibility
after protecting pedophile priests. Also, cries of racial profiling continue to
be hurled at the government, again, surprise surprise, by the radical left and
the ACLU. Last time I checked, the ÒLetÕs Destroy America ClubÓ is made up
exclusively of....Muslims!! Rather than be defensive, I suggest the Muslim
community police itself more stringently and out those that are involved with
terrorist organizations. Otherwise, donÕt whine when/if we see attacks here in
the USA and all them are rounded up and placed in internment camps for their
own security and ours! Imagine the outcry if 19 men were picked up by the FBI
on September 10, 2001.
Finally, can
someone please tell that whiny snit Paul Begala that 9-11, not George Bush,
should bear the majority of the blame for todayÕs current economic decline? If
I hear him whine one more time blaming President Bush and his tax cuts for the
state of our economy...I donÕt want to kick in my TV.
Poll after poll
illustrate the fact that the majority of Americans overwhelmingly support
President Bush in the war on terror. ThereÕs a vocal minority that just doesnÕt
get it. They want to bang their bongos, make their own clothes, fly to Iraq to
be human shields, and voice their contempt for America. TheyÕll never get it,
or at least until they find gainful employment, start a family, and come to
grips with the fact that the US of A is the greatest country in the world to
live in and they are a part of it.
With that power
comes great responsibility. We did not start this fight, we were attacked on
9-11. However, we will finish this fight because itÕs the right thing to do.
The costs will be great, but we cannot shirk our duty, we cannot dishonor those
that died on 9-11. ThatÕs why we fight, to protect our freedoms and the
freedoms of idiotic Americans everywhere...
Jon Alvarez
Syracuse, NY
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 20
Mar 2003 19:21:54 -0800 (PST)
From: Òcesar
castellanosÓ littlecesar_2002@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: the
illegal war
your voice has
been heard. its good to know that freedom of speech is being practiced in our
society. despite the fact that i disagree with your opinion, i welcome the
views of others, and therefore hear your voice. but FYI, there is a difference
between fredom of speech and slander. i can only hope that ALL americans,
including the ÒidioticÓ (which 99% of the country is anyway despite their
views on the war) ones, can respect the opinions of others, without
resorting to childish name-calling. the only way we know we are right, is by
hearing the views of others, and deciding for ourselves. thank you for sharing
your views.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 21
Mar 2003 02:12:45 -0800 (PST)
From:
"gumie bearÓ gumie23@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: the
illegal war
I have been
reading what every one is saying about the war and the UN and so. I am not a
teacher nor a good speller. I do understand that saddam is a crazy mad man. A
guy, that with time has rebuilt an army & started to rebuilt his weapons of
mass distruction. I understand that we needed the UN to make it legal. I just
donÕt think that the UN has the balls anymore. I and many other americans think
that saddam is playing with us. He is using the useless UN to buyd time. He was
tring to make a Nuke. He was helping (i am not going to spell this right)
al-quida. Does any one know for sure? No but there is a lot we donÕt know. With
technology today we can cut the civilian casulties down. This was still
nessasary to stop him. What happens when we let him go about his business and
then he makes his weapon and uses it to hit us? Then we all pay the price.
I say hit them
now and kill everyone that ever said a bad thing about us. Then when we are
done, we can send over millions of dollars that we donÕt have to help them get
bigger and better then ever. Look at Japan. They canÕt beat us in a war. But
they could buy us first.
My biggest
concern and a lot of other peoples concerns, why are we spending money and
things we donÕt need. Why are paying actors 20 million a picture and teachers
30k?? What is that? How much did Micheal Jordan make in his prime?? Why canÕt
we look at where the problems really are?
So where does it
end? I belive that there will always be a Crazy sick man trying to rule the
world.
Bryan
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 21
Mar 2003 13:18:09 -0800 (PST)
From:
"Eric BurgessÓ <zteecher@yahoo.com>
Dear
Jon,
I
write to you merely to point out the irony of you protesting protesters. The
Òblatant anti-AmericanismÓ that bothers you to such a degree is actually
Americans exercising their First Amendment rights. It is the same right you
enjoyed as you composed your message. So, in answer to your opening question of
Òwhat the @#!& is going on in America?Ó, well, we are acting like
Americans. Thanks for the reminder, though.
Since
IÕm here I might as well respond to the rest of your thoughtful and eloquent
message. I agree that the war on Afghanistan has Òwreaked incredible havoc and
destruction,Ó but your comparison of the U.S. war to the Soviet aggression is
utterly misguided. The 1979 Soviet invasion was a preemptive war against
Islamist terrorists by a threatened government. If you had used the current
U.S. attack on Iraq instead I would have much more respect for you in your
understanding of history. Bush is acting less like the leader of the Òfree
worldÓ and more like a leader of a repressive regime that whimsically wields
his power without thought to world opinion or future consequences. There is one
comparison that does work: The ÒBush DoctineÓ of pre-emptive attack hearkens
back to the ÒBrezhnev Doctrine,Ó a Soviet policy introduced by Leonid Brezhnev,
which stated:
"When forces that are hostile to socialism and try to turn
the development of some socialist country towards capitalism, it becomes not
only a problem of the country concerned, but a common problem and concern of
all socialist countries."
Sound
like anybody we know?
Even
though he is the leader of the most powerful nation in the world, you excuse
BushÕs cowboy tactics; but how ÒdumbÓ is it to act like a high plains drifter
in the civilized world? In your attempt to justify BushÕs attack on Iraq you explain,
ÒYou canÕt reason with terrorists, you have to destroy them. A group that
willingly murders women and children needs to disappear.Ó I need only to point
out that human rights atrocities committed by the U.S. in Nicaragua, Libya,
Grenada, Haiti, Colombia, Indonesia, Chile, Guatemala, Vietnam, El Salvador,
Korea, Panama, the Phillipines, and various countries in Africa, just to name a
few (if you want facts on any or all these references, just ask). The United
States has been committing terrorist acts from 1899 to this very morning in
Iraq. As the saying goes, Jon, those who live in glass houses shouldnÕt throw
rocks. 9/11 was a rock thrown back.
Why
do you hold such disdain for the United Nations? You make it seem as if Bush
went to the UN for authorization for war as a courtesy. This is international
law. When he failed to get the support he chose to start a war against the UNÕs
wishes; hence, an illegal war. You say, ÒNow weÕre seeing who has a stomach for
this fight, and who doesnÕt.Ó Jon, the United Nations was established after the
world had been through two wars that devastated the global psyche. Please read
the preamble to the UN Charter http://www.un.org/Overview/Charter/preamble.html
which explains that the main reason for such an institution is Òto save
succeeding generations from the scourge of war.Ó The United States, as
civilized people, should have been able to avoid war, especially when UN
weapons inspectors had free reign in Iraq for weeks and found nothing that
would implicate Hussein. This is
not a Òjust war,Ó which is precisely why so many major countries are against
it.
You
offer the definition of sedition as Òincitement
of resistance to or insurrection against lawful authorityÓ yet you conveniently
omit the rest of the definition which reads Òespecially in the violent
overthrow of the government.Ó I will give you the benefit of the doubt and
assume that this was an inadvertent omission, not just another distortion of facts
in order to better illustrate your point. Yet again,
your ignorance shines through when you accuse the protesters of not being
Òhonest, law-abiding, gain-fully employedÓ citizens. Does that mean that the
war supporters holding flags and ÒSupport BushÓ signs fall into the same
category? You, of all people, should understand that, just as you passionately
believe that AmericaÕs involvement in Iraq is right, others believe with just
as much fervor that our nation is wrong. This strong belief has drawn many to
the streets to let America and the world know that they do not support this act
of aggression. Look in the mirror before you heap insults upon those with whom
you disagree.
May
I again point out the irony of your Hollywood boycott. Sure, you may stickinÕ
to the celebrity man but you are also hurting the economy by not exercising
your consumer power. The worse the economy gets the worse it looks for Bush. A
debate on his impotent tax plan does not have a place in this discussion but I
would be happy to take it up at any time.
When
you say that Òwe did not
start this fight, we were attacked on 9-11Ó all you need to do is take a moment
and understand why anti-American sentiment is so rampant throughout the world,
especially in the Middle East. If the Saudis were setting up military camps
next the Lincoln Memorial and the Statue of Liberty, you would be one of the
first to come out against them as ÒinvadersÓ and, depending on the depth of
your patriotism, maybe even employ violence to expel them. Walk a mile in a
MuslimÕs shoes and then talk to me. Yes, we were attacked, but because our
Imperial acts over the past century, we have been asking it. Before you blow
your top and accuse me of political blasphemy, read a history book.
Jon,
your denigration of peace protesters who Òbang their bongosÓ is ironic since
you are doing some bongo banging of your own. The only difference I see is that
you have bought into the propaganda and good-ole boy charm of Bush while
ignoring the well-documented past actions and self-serving, exploitive policies
of the United Sates of America. IÕll say it again: Those that fail to ignore
the mistakes of the past are doomed to repeat them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 21
Mar 2003 13:48:05 -0800 (PST)
From:
"Joseph VasquezÓ <jvasque8@yahoo.com>
A Dear Jon
Letter from
The
Anti-American American
Joe Vasquez
In
recent days I have heard various conservatives, republicans, democrats, and
yes, even liberals, bandy around the Òanti-americanÓ epithet as freely as a
Salem pre-pubescent would cry Òwitch!Ó What makes one Òanti-american?Ó The
answer is quite simple: vocally oppose war on Iraq, deplore the imperialistic
aims of this administration, reject the new manifest destiny, feel compassion
for your fellow human begins, dare to speak out against a tyrant at home, and
dispute the loss of personal freedom. I wish to declare that, at this moment, I
am anti-american.
The
president says that war is his last option, then why did he run his 2000
campaign with the promise of ridding the world of the incorrigible Saddam? Why
did he stack his administration with a flock of chicken hawks who have been
chomping at the bit ever since big daddy Bush decided to leave Saddam in power
(and, consequently, allow for the massacre Kurdish and Shiite populations)? War
is the first resort of the bully. Prior to September 11, the Los Angeles Times
ran an article that predicted Bush II would eventually turn his focus to Iraq
and unfinished business. It is unfortunate that the article is not rerun and
that I had not the foresight to clip it, but alas, I did not realize the import
of it until the famed ÒAxis of EvilÓ speech. We are told that Iraq and other
Òrogue nationsÓ are plotting our demise. This may be true, and a brief history
lesson would prove the logic behind such animosity (after all, why did Saddam
have free reign throughout the cold war?), but will reacting in a manner that
verifies our enemiesÕ accusations improve matters any? Maybe, if one accepts
the logic behind the phrase Òkill them all, let God sort them out,Ó then it
would follow that if we kill enough people there will be no one left to oppose
or threaten us, but that sounds like genocide to me. Why do our young have to
tie up the loose ends of old men whose version of diplomacy is/was motivated by
the doctrine that might is right, and we are always right? No, war is not
necessary. I am anti-american.
The
recently authored ÒBush DoctrineÓ proposes that the United States spread
democracy, liberty and a free-market economy to all nations, as if these three
concepts must go hand in hand. True, democracy is good. Liberty, IÕll take that
too please. Free-market economy? I donÕt think the president was thinking of
the financial well being of foreign nations. In fact, isnÕt part of the problem
we are now facing (global terrorism, rogue nations/leaders) because of our
free-market approach to the world? ArenÕt those our companies employing
children, destroying habitats, and bribing dictators all in the name of the
almighty profit margin? And arenÕt those our companies laying off Americans to
move their factories to poorer nations in order to better their end of year
reports? Who is putting our working stiffs out of work? Immigrants? No . . . it
is the economic elite, the upper class. If thatÕs free-market economy, then I
say burn the market down! Change the system so it fits the needs of the people.
The Bush Doctrine reminds me of the proverbial ÒWhite ManÕs BurdenÓ that
defined the British EmpireÕs outlook on the world: England must help the
darkies. Is it time for an American Empire? No. I am anti-american.
I
hate the comparisons of Bush II to Hitler as much as the Pat Buchanan does, but
Bush II is proving himself quite a menace to the world. No, you say? Think
about it: What nation is ready to bomb at least any nation without provocation
(suspicion, not matter how much intelligence is gathered, is not provocation)?
What government is threatening an entire region with destruction unless it sees
things its way? What country has told the entire world, including centuries-old
allies, that they are Òeither with us or with the terrorists?Ó You guessed it!
And why? Because American life is so precious! We fear another September 11,
and rightly so. I hated seeing the footage of the towers burning and eventually
falling. I watched it live, as did many others, and it hurt. After all Òevery
man is a piece of the continent, a part if the main.Ó IsnÕt the life of an Iraqi
housewife equal to that of an American doctor? ShouldnÕt we weep just as hard
at hearing the news of a Palestinian child caught in crossfire as we do when we
learn of an American serviceman falling off an aircraft carrier? The tyrant at
home does not care. It seems, too, that much of the public does not care
either. IsnÕt the effect of the current Òshock and aweÓ campaign an act of
terrorism (it aims to terrorize the people of Iraq so that they do not fight
the invasion)? If we loose but one life to violence, the Earth is the less. I
am anti-american.
I
do not think I need comment on the Patriot Act and the legislation that it is
sure to inspire. No, rather, I would like to state two points: 1) I hate Saddam
and think he should be removed. What he has done to his people is indeed
horrendous. But, I will not support Òregime changeÓ since this is a regime that
was supported by us. There is not enough water in the oceans to wash our hands.
His people must take care of him, just as Gandhi vanquished the British (remember
him?). By the way, there is no comparison between Saddam and Hitler. The 1991
War stopped IraqÕs Nazi impression so give it a rest. He needs to go. His
people need help, but bombing a nation with 21,000-pound bombs does not sound
like liberation to me. 2) The French are not our enemy. I have been to Paris,
and yes I encountered some rudeness, but I also visited Winslow, Arizona and
was given the cold shoulder. My affinity for the French resides in the three
words at the heart of the French Republic: Liberty, Equality, Fraternity. True,
these are high ideals, but isnÕt it noble and just to want a world where all
people are created equal and treated with equal respect? The French arenÕt
perfect. I know that France may have its own economic interests in mind, but
since they seem to be the leading country against the tide of war, I stand with
them! I stand for justice, personal freedom and basic human decency! I am
anti-American.
I
hearken back to the image of the United States as a city upon the hill, a
shinning example to all nations of what a democratic republic could be. I hear
the call of Whitman and Thoreau on the wind as I walk to work each morning
trying to figure out how to educate my students so they can create a world
where fighting is truly never the answer. I feel the passions of Patrick Henry
welling up within me as I hear or read about the unpatriotic nature of
protestors in this nation. I weep whenever I think of KingÕs ÒI Have a DreamÓ
speech and continue to hope, in spite of all that I see. I fear for the
soldiers sent to the Middles East, North Korea, etc. I am against unchecked
aggression. I am anti-American!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 21
Mar 2003 13:44:35 -0800 (GMT)
From: ÒKarrie
HensleyÓ <khensley4@earthlink.net
Subject:
Is it possible
for Americans to look at their country objectively?
As a new member
of the mailing list discussing the Òillegal warÓ which began with the inane
congressional aciton regarding Òfreedom friesÓ I feel itÕs time for me to
respond briefly.
What most
saddens me about the war in Iraq is that most Americans I talk to do not think
itÕs important to understand why our country would blatantly defie the laws set
forth by the United Nations. Americans continually respond that Saddam Hussein
is evil and must be destroyed at any cost. What boggles my mind is that these
same individuals have no basis for this assessment. How did the American
mind-set switch from the threat of Al Queda and Ossama Bin Laden to Saddam
Hussein and Iraq? Maybe IÕm the one whoÕs misinformed but I donÕt understand
why itÕs o.k. for my country to have weapons of mass destruction (and a history
of using them) and itÕs not o.k. for another sovereign nation to have them?
IÕm also unclear
why my country finds it necessary to change policy and laws whenever it suits
them. DonÕt we teach our children that if you are part of a group and the group
by majority decides on a course of action, you must go along with the group
even if you donÕt agree with it? IÕm sorry but I tend to look at things in
their most basic form in order to get my head around them and the basic logic
that has been presented to me by my countryÕs leaders just doesnÕt work.
Perhaps America
just believes that because we are the biggest and strongest nation we can do
whatever we want regardless of what anyone else thinks. If this is the case, we
better be prepared for more uprisings and lives lost because the rest of the
world will not sit around forever doing nothing. Somewhere, sometime we are
going to push the international community too far and then we will learn
(perhaps in our own backyard) what world war III looks like.
kh
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From:
ÒBrian DayÓ <therealslimbrian@hotmail.com>
Subject:
Re: the illegal war
Date:
Fri, 21 Mar 2003 15:21:25 -0800
Yeah!
What they said!!!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 22
Mar 2003 03:37:45 -0800
Subject: Re: the
illegal war
From: ÒJAX BOXÓ
<jaxbox@sbcglobal.net> |
Dearest Cesar,
Interesting, you
call 99% of Americans ÒIdioticÓ yet a few words later you say Òrespect the
opinions of others, without resorting to ÒChildishÓ name callingÓ not to
mention how condescending your tone was towards Jon's point of view. I'm sure
you feel the same about anybody else's view that isn't the same as yours. But I
digress.
I guess all those ÒIdioticÓ (oops! Childish name calling, my bad) people
(the other 1%?) who are ÒEnthusiastically DissentingÓ (I call it breaking the
law once they decide to obstruct traffic illegally) by blocking peoples cars
who are on their way to or from work or defacing property and wasting tons of
money that they are constantly bitching about being wasted by making the cities
send more officers to break up all of that ÒidioticÓ nonsense (my bad again)
costing the city more by having to send extra officers out there to control
these ÒEnthusiastically DissentingÓ people.
These are
the same students from the public school system which my tax dollars are going
to, that I work hard for. I'm sure 99% of them really don't have a clue as to
why their out there to begin with other than the fact that they can get out of
school for the day and act like they're at some mid afternoon Rave and think
it's ÒHip." It's actually pretty funny/sad that when they actually
get on camera and are asked why they are out there, once they open their mouths
it just shows that they really should back in the classroom, and that they
should start paying attention a little bit more so they can get a real
ÒEdjumakazun." (For further proof, look at these videos)
http://www.brain-terminal.com/video/nyc-2003-02-15/quicktime-hq.html
http://brain-terminal.com/video/sf-2003-03-15/quicktime-hq.html And as far as
all the other (Dissenters) people out there who aren't students, don't these
people have jobs? It looks like these ÒTree hugging, Birkenstock wearing,
Save the Caribou, Che wannabe'sÓ are the same people who are bleeding the U.S.
dry by using the food stamps and the welfare system to deprive the people that
actually need it, when they should be out there getting a job instead of
blaming the ÒSystemÓ for their laziness. Someone needs to tell them that
the ÒAge of AquariusÓ has long been played out and to quit bugging me every
time I go into the local Ò7-11Ó by standing out in front and asking me for
ÒSome spare change." You want spare change? Get yourself a
Spare Job!
"Enthusiastically
DissentÓ all you want, Light all the candles you want, sing Give Peace a Chance
all day and night, and dream all you want about hoping our country will
become the ÒSocialistÓ Utopia you all yearn for. I'm sure all your burned
out hippie, still living in the sixties, Trotsky Worshiping college professors
who filled your head with their Liberal/Socialistic views that you obediently
bought into and are now regurgitating them as your own beliefs, yeah, I'm sure
all their hearts are swelling with great pride as they watch all of these
protests going on. Dissent all you want, but just do it without infringing on
my rights and views, and let me decide for myself by not ÒEnthusiastically
DissentingÓ in front of my car when I have the green light!
COMMUNISM HAS
ONLY KILLED 100 MILLION PEOPLE... LET'S GIVE IT ANOTHER CHANCE!
BTW, would all of you illegal war protesting people be saying the same things
and feeling the same way if ÒGoreÓ would have been elected?
(Stop with the
ÒHanging Chad's and how it was stolen, just answer the question) Because
you did have your chance when ÒBill the BomberÓ was the President and he was
waging his ÒIllegal WarsÓ which were not sanctioned by the U.N. on Baghdad and
Bosnia among other countries (Shall I go on?) but there was nary a peep out of
any of you or the Limousine Liberal Hollywood half wits either. Calling
President Sheen, Calling President Sheen... hmmm no answer.
HOLLYWOOD
ACTIVISM... NOW THAT'S ENTERTAINMENT!!!
I doubt you
would. And I'm glad he wasn't elected because I don't think I could drive to
work everyday with Saddam's portrait on the wall of every building I pass to
get there knowing that ÒGoreÓ dismantled our Armed Forces (I don't think you
Liberal Ladies would like it very much if you had to be subservient to men
while wearing a ÒBurkaÓ (unless of course it said DKNY on it) now would you?
and remember ÒN.O.W.Ó would not even be able to exist) or
who actually cared about what the U.N. has to say whose members (France, Germany,
China, Syria and Libya) don't want us to take Saddam out because once we get
into Baghdad and find all the weapons he said he never had (he did say that he
didn't have any weapons right? so why did those SCUDS have to be shot
down?) which will all have ÒMade in France, Made in Germany, Made in ChinaÓ so
how illegal can this war be? Will you say anything about that? I
doubt that too!
The U.N.
is a Farce! Preamble Schmeamble! That is ÒWhy so many countries
are against it" The U.S. is held by the letter of the law but these
other countries aren't?
For nearly
60 years, the United Nations has marched relentlessly towards its vision of a
socialistic, one world government, all the while being financed by U.S.
taxpayers. (e.g. all the ÒEnthusiastic DissentersÓ)
The U.N.
has become worthless. This collection of dictatorial and predominately Muslim
regimes routinely condemns Israel, but refuses to enforce its own disarmament
resolutions against Saddam Hussein. It has no purpose other than to restrain the
United States from doing what it cannot find the courage to do. Its human
rights committee has been taken over by human rights abusers. Its disarmament
committee is soon to be chaired by Iraq. In Zimbabwe, hundreds of thousands of
Africans are facing starvation at the hands of their own thuggish government,
but the U.N. stands by silently. And how come France has their troops in North
Africa and nobody say's anything about that? And once again, why are they
there? But I digress.
We
contribute 25% of the U.N. budget since its inception, but it's not enough. No
matter what we do, the U.N. continues its attacks on U.S.
interests and
sovereignty, while we continue to pay their bills. It's time we put a STOP to
this nonsense.
Has anyone
noticed that the United Nations and a lot of the countries around the
world are saying, ÒHey, U.S., when it comes to North Korea, that's your problem
which you have to deal with unilaterally. This is not something for the UN to
get involved with, since we botched the inspections.Ó I find it amazingly
contradictory. When it comes to the North Koreans, the U.N. may as well not
exist. Once again, a farce.
And I hope
we never go back to the UN. Why would we want to re-empower the French in
deciding the postwar settlement? Why would we want to grant them influence over
the terms, the powers, the duration of an occupation bought at the price of
American and British blood?
France, Germany
and Russia did everything they could to sabotage our policy before the war.
Will they want to see it succeed after the war? Of course not, but they're
already trying to weasel their way into landing contracts to rebuild Iraq. Yes,
we lost at the U.N. Badly. But that signal defeat had one significant side
benefit. For the first time, Americans got to see what the U.N. truly is. The
experience has been an eye opener. The result has been an enormous
and huge shift in American public opinion regardless of what the Liberal
media says.
America finally
had a look inside this joke called the U.N. The image of the ``U.N.'' as a
legitimating institution had always been deeply sentimental, based on the U.N.
of their youth UNICEF, refugee help, earthquake assistance. A global Mother
Teresa. That's what they thought of the U.N., and that's why they held it in
esteem and cared about what it said. Now they know that the ``U.N.'' is not
UNICEF collection boxes, but a committee of cynical, resentful, ex-imperial
powers like France and Russia serving their own national interests and delighting
in frustrating America's without the slightest reference to the moral issues at
stake. The American public (Everyone who is not a Liberal/Democrat) understands
that this is not a body in which to entrust American values or American
security. The hypocrisy is stunning. But the deeper issue is that the principal
purpose of the Security Council is not to restrain tyrants, but to restrain the
United States
The Security
Council is nothing more than the victory coalition of 1945. That was six
decades ago. We need a new structure to be born out of the Iraq coalition it
should be with allies who helped us, who share our vision and our purposes. Not
with France, Germany, Russia and China, who see us as the threat and whose
singular purpose will be to subvert any victory. There were wars and
truces and treaties long before the U.N. was created, as there will be after
its demise, there is no need to formally leave the U.N., if we just ignore
it, Without us, it will wither away.
And God forbid
that we capture Saddam alive, the ACLU will probably rush to represent him and
defend his rights as a ÒHuman BeingÓ and deny he ever committed any war
crimes (Killer, rapist, torturer, of hundreds of thousands of people, and
that's not even counting what his sons have done) and present him as being
ÒMisunderstoodÓ or a victim of the 9/11 propaganda. Will you still put
your faith in the U.N. to tell us how to run our country?
Will you change
your mind once you start seeing the evidence that you haven't seen one ÒIotaÓ
of showing Saddam's link to Al Qaeda? (He has said he isn't linked to them, yet
he said he had no weapons either coughSCUDScough) Will you speak out when
you see the proof of all the inhumane things that Saddam has done to
his own people and actually hear from those he has tortured? (How's that
Olympic team of their's doing BTW?) Do you speak for those people
too? How much longer can you throw out that typical
Liberal/Democrat/Marxist/socialist rhetoric?
ÒIt's all 9/11
propagandaÓ ÒDon't believe the right wing media...
yada yada yadaÓ
Or you can just
stick with the most common one that the former President, Mrs. Hillary Clinton
has used to death... ÒIt's a Vast Right Wing Conspiracy!Ó
But then again
it's Blood for Oil. Brilliant! Bravo! Such clever slogans. If
we are so hard up for oil, why didn't we just take what we should have when we
were in kuwait in Ò91?Ó They needed us to save their collective asses, so who
would have stopped us from just taking it? I'm still paying over $2.00 a
gallon for gas, yet they have have never given us a break on the
price of oil yet the French have a sweet deal with Iraq (Is that one of
the reasons they vetoed us every time?
hmmmmmm) which
enables them to buy oil at 40% below the market value with ÒEuro DollarsÓ
(another great example of ÒAmerica come and help usÓ and once we do, ÒNOW GET
THE F*** OUT! You guy's are Evil Tyrants and Imperialists!). And as far
as being imperialistic, exactly which countries are we forcibly occupying now?
But we're the
ÒBig Bullies" Funny, but I've never heard of or seen a ÒBullyÓ ever
ask permission to kick someone's ass or to take their lunch money before?
But yet in this ÒRUSH TO WARÓ since 9/11, (Propaganda to you guy's and
probably in about 30 years from now, you'll probably deny it ever even happend
just like alot of people now say there never was a ÒHolocaustÓ) which has
now been over a year and half, we tolerated the U.N.'s shenanigans and
waited... a year and a half? Some ÒRUSH TO WARÓ
You need
to understand, we are hated because we are the greatest Country in the world.
Everyone wants our freedom, way of life and everything else that goes with it.
And don't kid yourself, if they could be in our position they wouldn't feel
guilty about it ÒOne Iota!" Can you tell me why if we our so
despised by every other country on earth, why do all these people from these
other countries want to move here? Why does our way of life intrigue them
so much, enough to make them want to live here yet when asked about their
feelings for us, they despise us? Even though they live here and enjoy the life
of an American (Sounds like Liberal ideology to me, always wanting it
both waysÓ) Go live in their country (any other country for that matter) and
try to use the freedom that this great country gives you and act the way
you act here and see how fast you'll miss this great country, you'll be home
faster than a ÒHuman Shield!Ó
You hate it so
much? Leave. What do you do if you don't like the
house or apartment you live in? You buy a different one or move to
another one, you don't like your job? Quit and get another one. You're
disgusted with this Country? You hate what it stands for? You
believe we deserved 9/11? (Or as someone said earlier ÒThink of it as a
Rock thrown backÓ yeah I'm sure that's exactly what those people and their
families thought it was that day as they got the news that their loved ones
were murdered on 9/11! Nice Analogy! I'm sure you would say the same
thing, and feel the same way if any of your loved ones were
killed that day too. ÒOh your Mommy was murdered, but that's O.K. because we
deserved it, so as you grow up and she's not around to be a part of your life,
just ÒThink of It as a Rock Thrown BackÓ whenever you miss her.)
In"F'ing"credible!
You
all believe weÕre the big bad Imperialistic Aggressors whose image is tarnished
and are worried about what other people think about us.
It must be
torture for you while your sitting in Starbucks reading old issues of ÒPravdaÓ
while listening to Ò90.7 KPFKÓ on your radio, just seething about how ashamed
you are to be an American. (I mean, we have been terrorists since
1899) It must be so hard for you wake up everyday in
this TERRIBLE COUNTRY and go on with your everyday life knowing how horrible it
is (OH THE SHAME!) to actually live in this country. Then just
leave this Horrible place aned live in a country that is on the same page as
your myopic views.
Real
simple.
Deep down I know
all the loyal card carrying Liberal/Democrats are hoping that we fail miserably
and that there is a tremendous loss of life (our troops included) because
that is the only way your actions and ideology will be justified (Liberal
Situational Ethics at itÕs best) , because none of what youÕve hoped for or
predicted has happened. Awwww too bad :(
USA USA USA,
SHOCK AND AWE SHOCK AND AWE SHOCK AND AWE, USA USA USA
MAY GOD CONTINUE
TO BLESS THIS GREAT COUNTRY AND THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN IT.
Jack
Barcelo
--------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 23
Mar 2003 08:24:04 -0800
Subject: Re: the
illegal war
From: "Eric
Burgess" <zteecher@yahoo.com>
dearest jack,
it's clear why
you enjoy the pentagon's war strategy since your e-mails follow the same
pattern: "shock and awe." you immerse a few shaky "facts"
from fox news/cnn in a deluge of xenophobia and self-righteous indignation
regarding any view against the war-mongering administration. "no blood for
oil" is a simple slogan because it just as simply sums up the
bush/cheney/halliburton agenda. it seems a bit hypocrital, though, to criticize
the use of slogans, then turn around and bust out with "america: love it
or leave it." remember that for every one american killed by international
terrorism, american military action ("terrorism", by definition) has
claimed thousands more. again, i respect your views, but they all seem to come
from the same sources.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 23
Mar 2003 19:46:24 -0800
Subject: Re: the
illegal war
From: "JAX
BOX" <jaxbox@sbcglobal.net>
My Dearest Eric,
yes I'm really
enjoying this war. I'm enjoying that our troops are in harms way with the
potential for many lives to be lost on both sides including civilians, serving
their country that you have every right to trash and bash as you are. I'm
enjoying the fact that we treat their armed forces as they should be when they
surrender or are captured, yet they torture and shoot our captured troops
execution style.
Yet you refuse
to even think that this is what has been going on in this country for years and
that the U.N. never did anything to stop it, and now that it's happening to our
troops you'll still say, that's why we shouldn't be there, those troops
deserved it for "Terrorizing" this despicable regime. You and your
Comrades were probably whooping it up when you heard that one of our soldiers
killed one of our own and wounded fifteen by lobbing 3 grenades in their tent.
Whoopee! You should be proud of yourselves! I'd bet everything I have that the
ACLU is already preparing to defend this guy from being charged of treason and
shot by a military court.
And how about
now that we're finding out how the Russians had technical advisors in Baghdad
all this time showing them how to use radar jamming equipment that Iraq was
prohibited to have? They've been selling them to them the last two years even
when they said they weren't. Let me think, wasn't russia one of the main ones
in the U.N. screaming that we shouldn't invade Iraq? I wonder why? Let's see,
France and China and Syria have been to so you think they have something to
hide to?
Doesn't it
strike you as a bit hypocritical that these iraqi ambassadors who go on tv and
condemn us, when yet they do this to their own people and have been for years?
And now for the world to see, our captured troops (actually mechanics who they
think made a wrong turn).
Probably not
because as usual you have your Bleeding heart Blinders on and refuse to
recognize the fact that Saddam has been doing these things for years.
And as far as
shaky facts, where do you get yours from? Are you sitting in with the military
leaders who are in charge there? are you in iraq right now? I haven't seen you
as a correspondent on t.v. since the war started, so who say's you know anymore
than I do about the facts of this war? You?
Every time I put
some facts up here or I should say "Rush to the History books and cut and
paste" facts up here, who are you to say they aren't true? Hell you don't
even have cable television! You have access through the internet just like I
do. So Excuse me if I don't run my facts by you every time before I post them.
For you
information I don't just log on to fox news or cnn (don't you know that CNN is
a liberally biased station? oh that's right, you don't have cable) on either
the internet or the television until I read everything from both sides (Right
and Left) of this debate. And I admit that's all I have to go on, but so do you
and all of my other "Fans" who are in on this debate. So what makes
your facts any better than anyone else's?
So if by saying
my facts are shaky "Because You Say They Are" and calling me
"Self Righteous" (Now that's the pot calling the kettle black, Mr.
"Think of it as a Rock Thrown Back at us" because we deserved it!
Actually that's the Stupidest thing I've ever heard!) don't even patronize me
by saying "I respect your views, but they all seem to come from the same
source" because you don't!
And as far as
saying "America, love it or leave it" I never said that as a slogan,
I just told you that if you don't like it here, it is your American right to
leave. I didn't tell you to, I just said you can if you want to, it's your
choice.
You just can't
seem to grasp that if you're going to protest under the delusional notion that
we deserved to have 9/11 happen to us, a lot of people will not appreciate it,
so stop your whining about others who don't appreciate your views, you don't
appreciate theirs. Thats the chance you take no matter what you protest.
And how do I
respond to "Deluge of Xenophobia" towards me? Is that what your
opinion is of me as long as you've know me? Being a mutt myself
(Mexican/Sicilian/American) and knowing what it's like to be discriminated
against, do you really think I have a fear of foreign people? Call me an
"I.A." again, but don't say that I'm prejudice against other races
you "Honkey!" j/k... I have clients who are of the muslim faith, and
are from that part of the world and I'm not afraid of them nor do I dislike
them because they are. But you don't know that.
In response to
Dick's earlier response, (unfortunately, I won't be able to answer all of my
"Fans" responses individually due to the overwhelming responses) Dick
I respect the fact that you were actually involved in the vietnam war which
because of LBJ who escalated our involvement because of the Gulf of Tonkin
"Non" incident which yes, even i know was way wrong!
But in no way
can I agree with your sympathy for Saddam. "Perhaps Saddam is too human to
unleash biological and chemical terror" are you kidding me? why don't you
"For once not think, with Left-wing rhetoric." Too Humane? Gassing
and killing hundreds of thousand of his own people? Too Humane? He just got
through shooting are "Mechanics" execution style and parading their
bodies all over the world. Too Humane??? Spare me! He is as crafty as a fox and
knows that if he uses them 1) he will lose the sympathy from people like
yourself and the U.N. who buy into his lies. 2) He knows that there will be no
way he could ever be justified in using them and besides he's been saying for
years he doesn't have any right?
And as I'm
typing this, it was just confirmed that a huge 100 acre chemical weapons
factory 90 miles south of Baghdad was just found. But how could that be? Saddam
the Humanitarian said he doesn't have any of those plants, the so called U.N.
inspectors who needed more time to look where Saddam let them look couldn't
find them, that damn Right Wing War Mongering Propaganda!
I guess now it
proves that they've always had them. How much more proof do you need? I'm sure
you'll think of something.
But first let me
have Eric confirm if all the major television newscasts facts are correct or
not, I've tried to call him but I think he's on the line with the leaders of
the coalition so we might have to wait awhile to see if "His" sources
can find out if any of these things are shaky or true.
Now let me ask
you a question Dick, have any of your relationships with either friends,
family, girlfriends, co-workers or anybody for that matter, have they ever
changed or ended as the years go by? Meaning, at first you and whoever the
other person was got along great. Then for whatever reason, it just got worse
quicker than the French surrendering in World War II? You don't think
relationships never change?
I'm not denying
who put Saddam in power, but once he became despotic then he needed to go. Just
like a marriage gone bad where let's say it's so great the first year, then the
next years the husband is physically abusing the wife, but yet nobody but the
wife knows, because to his friends and neighbors he's such a swell guy but to
his wife who knows better, he's a brutal coward. Relationships Change.
You're more than
welcome to go the PC route in touting Frances so called "Agony of
Occupation" but they just laid down like the Weasels they are. I'm sure
you admired the actions of the "Vichy Regime" who fought against our
allied troops during world war two because they too were Right Wingers. Go ahead
and tell me how noble the "Vichy" were and what they did was
justified. I'm sure you can.
Once again I
respect the fact that you were in a war and actually know what it's like to be
in one, where as myself and the other people here don't. But if i'm correct in
what you were trying to say at the end there (You lost me at
"Vicissitudes" there), was, just because I never fought in a war,
people like myself should only listen to those that have just because we
haven't been there? If that's correct, then I should believe the leaders of our
military forces because obviously many of them have been in wars before too and
i'm sure many of them had a higher ranking than you did. I'm not trying to be
flippant here with you, I'm just asking.
Now that all
these Right Wing Propaganda lies will start being proven wrong, what other Left
Wing Propaganda will you come up with to refute them?
Jack
--------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 23
Mar 2003 20:08:24 -0800
Subject: Re: the
illegal war
From: "Eric
Burgess" <zteecher@yahoo.com>
amid all the
opinions and facts, there is one thing we can all agree on:
a dead marine is
a dead marine.
--------------------------------------------------------------