Letters to the WSWS

30 June 2003

Below we post a selection of recent letters to the World Socialist Web Site.

OnNew York Timesreporter Judith Miller accused of ‘hijacking’ military unit in Iraq

Another excellent report. Thanks for taking on the propaganda presstitutes and telling the truth. As in Martha Stewart, Jayson Blair and others, the sacrificial lambs are made an example of while the really corrupt go unscathed. We do need a revolution to throw out all the elite gangsters who are now ruining our country.

G

27 June 2003

* * *

Dear Bill,

Great article. There are many things one must thank the WSWS for and this is one of them. Nobody else is talking about Miller in any of the mainstream media that I have seen. No one is “connecting the dots”—to turn a phrase on its promulgators. This is just one of many articles that I will send far and wide for the edification of my friends and family. Although I frequently support you with polemical fare of my own, I do not thank you often enough for providing a forum and a context that make my own contributions possible. Thank you for going to the heart of events, plucking out the pith and making a Promethean offer of it to a dazed and confused humanity.

As Ernest Partridge of the web site CrisisPapers [www.crisispapers.org] has said in an exhortation to the journalists of the world, “It’s time for some spinal transplants.” There is no better example of spinal integrity than the WSWS.

Glad you read Breslin, too.

CZ

San Francisco

27 June 2003

* * *

Your report is 100 percent right. For the US government & Mr. Bush to know what is coming in Iraq all they have to do is spend two hours reading the history of Iraq, particularly between 1916 and 1958.

It is very distressing to see civilians suffering and lacking basic essentials because of the bad planning of a mighty government which thinks it knows everything and can make a better world.

Iraq is not Afghanistan and Iraqis are very difficult to rule. They are not as dumb as the US government thinks they are. Iraqis resent any subordinate treatment.

Regards,

LM

27 June 2003

* * *

On “American military morale shaken by Iraq quagmire

As a former Marine I would like to send out a prayer to all of the enlisted men and women who took an oath to defend this country and who were, instead, used as mercenaries to secure land, oil and power by an illegal and unelected regime and their backers. I sincerely hope you all make it back here in one piece and that you can be fairly compensated and cared for. Nothing like this should ever happen again.

PK

27 June 2003

* * *

On “What is the US military doing on the Iraq-Syria border?

As usual, a fine report. You noted the New York Times story. This one, “Syrians Wounded in Attack by U.S. on Convoy in Iraq” made reference to the military specifically seeking approval from Bush. So that means that this was a targeted assassination, something that is acknowledged as a war crime (not that indiscriminate killing isn’t). It personally involves him in the decision-making.

It goes well beyond what the Israelis are doing (also a war crime). While they create a good deal of collateral damage they also pretty much have a specific and known target.

We are targeting on the basis of rumor and tips. He might be present. Kill them all, then see if we got him.

This is the same heartless approach to death that he took as governor. Out of 152 death appeals he approved 151. One was so outrageous he had to disapprove it. He spent no time at all considering them and read summaries that left out pertinent information.

[The Israeli newspaper] Ha’aretz reported his alleged comments at conference with Abbas and Sharon that God had told him to attack Afghanistan and God had told him to attack Iraq. So we seem to be dealing with a psychopath being directed by God.

RR

28 June 2003

* * *

On “Bush invokes ‘enemy combatant’ rule against defendants

Asst. Atty. Genl Chertoff was the point man for the Justice Department on enemy combatant issues. When the administration was at first saying only non-citizens would be charged, it was Cherfoff who was asserting that the president had the right to charge US citizens and was only refraining from doing so. He appeared for numerous interviews and before professional groups such as the ABA defending these fascist acts.

They even went so far as to twist the meaning of the Bill of Rights to assert that the right to a speedy trial by one’s peers only arose after being charged with a crime. One could be held indefinitely as long as he was not charged.

Chertoff was approved for appointment to the US Court of Appeals by an 88-1 vote. Only Sen. Clinton voted against the man so heavily involved in Republican hunts for her husband’s scalp.

RR

25 June 2003