Letters to the WSWS

7 June 2003

Below we post a selection of recent letters to the WSWS.

On “A presidential visit to Auschwitz—The Holocaust and the Bush family fortune

I, too, have wondered just why Bush visited Auschwitz at this time and why he chose to do so. The whole reason for the visit has an eerie ring to it and a sense of sinister motives. The visit seemed very ill-advised to me given Bush’s history, administration policies such as the death camp at Guantanamo Bay, and the timing.

MD

USA

6 June 2003

* * *

My parents were immigrants from Europe. Before WW II they corresponded with their families in Europe. Before the war and after it started we followed the news very closely.

It was a known fact at that time that the rich in the US made great fortunes by supplying war materiel, had investments in Germany and helped the Nazi party financially. I remember the letters, news broadcasts and the tears that were shed because the US, Canada’s neighbor, used the war for profit and only entered the war when many people died and the Nazis were weakened by armies and air forces that escaped from Europe to England through the underground. The US made themselves the heroes through the spilling of European and Canadian blood.

I am a senior and when I try to tell the younger generation what really happened they smile and more or less give the idea that old people are senile and the good people of the US would never have committed such an unforgivable sin.

This is the first time that I have read what we from the past experienced. It is a crime that other newspapers and magazines do not print similar articles. I congratulate you on an article that should be read by everyone but I hope that you will not be hurt by the truth that you have written.

MK

5 June 2003

* * *

Thanks for publishing this excellent article about the nefarious nexus between the Bush family and the Third Reich. With the younger Bush now trying to control the world, he is fulfilling Hitler’s geopolitical dream. We are now in the Fourth Reich, I think.

Sincerely,

SM

5 June 2003

* * *

An excellent article about the Bush Family/Third Reich connection. Keep up the good work.

5 June 2003

* * *

I just wanted to say thank you for the clear, concise and well-written article. I had learned sometime ago about the involvement of Ford with Nazi affiliates, but was unaware of Bush’s family history also.

I feel a strong need to know the full truth and felt that your article delivered the goods.

Most Sincerely,

EH

5 June 2003

* * *

“History is a reminder of what’s possible,” said George Bush on his recent tour. Knowing him, it sounds more like a threat against the American people and what his plans are for us if we don’t march to the GOP (goosestep on parade)!

I bet he’s drooling at the mouth over this idea! The trip gave him some ideas to add to his Patriot Act 1 and 2. The “possibilities” are endless.

As he stood at the ovens and spoke about the little baby shoes from the infants that were killed in those ovens, little thought if any was given to the children who have suffered and died under his reckless rule!

PC

6 June 2003

On “An exchange with a US war correspondent

Dear WSWS,

David Walsh’s reply of 24 May to Sig Christenson of the San Antonio Express-News is intellectually vigorous and thoroughly upstanding. That Christenson, who flaunts the designation of “embedded war correspondent,” would resort to emotional simplisms and infantile reasoning is monumentally pathetic. What a clueless Lilliputian.

Sincerely yours,

AW

26 May 2003

* * *

Dear Editor:

It was a pleasure to read Walsh’s excellent rejoinder to the inane and insulting letter from the San Antonio Express-News correspondent Sig Christenson. The contrast between the superficial contents of this letter and the intelligent (and hard-hitting) response of Walsh’s reply could not be more glaring. Christenson’s letter is filled with insults and shuns any debate on the substantive issues raised by Walsh about Michael Kelly and David Bloom. Most of the reporters of the corporate press, unconsciously and consciously, have become nothing but ideological foot soldiers at the service of the criminal cabal running the US government today. The role they played as “embedded” correspondents during the recent US onslaught against Iraq was revolting. Not only are these journalists intellectually shallow but many also seem to lack the necessary technical writing skills required of journalists, as illustrated by snippets of Christenson’s writing. It is nice to note that some of the articles exposing these self-indulgent ideologues are hitting the mark.

MK

Atlanta

28 May 2003

* * *

Regarding David Walsh’s reply to the “embedded war correspondent” from the San Antonio Express-News, poor Sig Christenson never knew what hit him!

MB

30 May 2003

* * *

If he was a roving reporter for the Florida Times Union, then it is not surprising that he would have superficial and reactionary views. I have the misfortune of living in the Jacksonville area. The FTU is the only game in town. They often show an amazing lack of knowledge, although that does not stop them from writing stirring, fire-breathing attacks on all things liberal. Most of their political columnists are from the extreme right. They love and print most of the people mentioned in the rebuttal.

While for the most part they do not distort the news, they do seem to censor by omission, particularly the activities of Governor Bush and the Republican-led legislature.

They were ardent supporters of the war. They beat the drums for finding Captain Speicher, who was the only pilot lost in Gulf I. Now that the war is over and he can’t be found, they seem to be abandoning him. They seem willing to see him declared dead twice, once in 1991 and now in 2003.

As for Kelly, I always thought of him as Kelly/Jacoby since both were equally distasteful in their views and had a similar style. I once caught one of them with three different versions of the same column, tailored to the particular audience and its prejudices.

Just because a man is dead doesn’t make him immune to criticism. Poor Caligula is often associated with our current president GW Bush.

RR

Florida

24 June 2003

* * *

Dear Sir,

Thank you for your article, which exposes the cruelty and barbarity of the invading forces in Iraq. I think I am beginning to understand why the western world is hated by the Muslim world. The reality is that it is the western governments that are posing a serious threat to peace and the freedom of ordinary people around the world. I am sickened by what has happened in Iraq and other countries due to imperialists who are the real axis of evil.

Thank you once again. Please keep up the good work.

ZB

4 June 2003

* * *

On “Britain: Blair caught in lies over Iraqi WMDs and “US government lied about Iraqi weapons to justify war

Dear WSWS Editors,

I just thought I’d let you know something that I heard today on the BBC Radio 4 morning news programme “Today.” It concerns the debate over the misleading of/lying to UK/US publics about the threat from Iraqi WMDs, and the pressure on Blair and Bush since none have been found. Woosley was interviewed to put the case that WMDs would be found and that there was credible evidence and leads concerning WMDs in Iraq; this was after an academic specialist had questioned the case that the mobile wagons found were in fact used for biological weapons and not something else. In response to the question “Where are the WMDs and what is the credible evidence?” Woosley referred to recent reports in the NYT and mentioned Judith Miller. I read the piece you posted on Miller last week and how her info came directly from Chalabi. Woosley wasn’t challenged by the BBC interviewer, but it exposed, at least for those of us who read the WSWS, the weak and spurious evidence that the “hawks” are having to rely on.

Just thought WSWS might want to know.

Keep up the good work,

Comradely regards,

BS

2 June 2003

* * *

I want to congratulate you with your informative article on the WMDs in Iraq, or rather, the absence of them.

Even in the US, a country presently governed by a junta without serious opposition, the not finding of WMDs is turning into a problem. Not because US citizens care about the truth these days—they have been adequately indoctrinated—but because Tony Blair might fall over the issue. And that would be hard to explain to the US population.

I am by now almost totally convinced that Iraq did not have active programs for weapons of mass destruction. So far, there’s just one problem for this theory: the two trucks. I am not a big fan of conspiracy theories, but with the constant lying of the US, one has to be suspicious. What do you think of the possibility that the two trucks (which Bush is so happy about) were assembled by Kurds, with or without the instigation of the Pentagon? The first truck was found by Kurds at a checkpoint (what about the driver, where did he come from, did he not have anything to say?), the second in Mosul, of all places, in the heart of Kurdish territory. Did Hussein suddenly turn stupid to send his trucks to the Kurds? So the trucks were found by Kurds, no products were found, nobody seems to know much about the trucks. Or did Iraqi authorities indeed acknowledge their existence for other purposes? Or is this acknowledgement only hearsay that can then be refuted by “the authority.” What is your opinion about all this? It is of course interesting that Hans Blix is not allowed near these trucks; still he is somewhat of an expert.

Besides, the reasoning that the trucks cannot be used for anything else than production of biological agents is kind of funny. It’s almost like finding a bike without a saddle, and then say: this bike cannot be used to ride, so it must have been used in the production of chemical weapons.

Sincerely,

KS

Antwerp, Belgium

31 May 2003

* * *

On “Imperialism and Iraq: Lessons from the past

* * *

Dear Editor:

Recently you have published a three-part article on the history of Iraq. It is an excellent article, which should be read by all those interested to learn about the complexity of the region. It can serve as an excellent introduction to an undergraduate student willing to be familiar with the history of Iraq.

Your web site produces excellent authoritative articles. Just carry on the good work. History repeats itself. Who would forget Nuri-al-Said, especially knowing what happened to him at the end!

Sincerely,

Dr. LA

6 June 2003

* * *

As a student decades ago in Perth, I recall discussions in the 70s about imperial domination of the oil rich Arab territories. In my recollection the sort of solid exposition provided by Jean Shaoul did not exist then or, at least, was not readily accessible in common information channels. For many people the sum of their knowledge of the “Middle East” was from seeing the film Lawrence of Arabia when it was released in the 60s.

A

4 June 2003

* * *

Congratulations on the article about British/Iraq history. The establishment has done much to cloud and deny real history. I like the history category on the web site. It’s important for people to have historical perspective. “How I became a socialist,” an article by Jack London is an important work.

Thanks.

JN

30 May 2003