Letters from our readers

10 July 2006

The following is a selection of recent letters to the World Socialist Web Site.

On “July 4th 2006: The state of US democracy 230 years after the American Revolution”

Your article was concise and brilliant. When very young, I was inspired by Thomas Paine. Where has America gone? Why do the people allow gangsters of every stripe to bully them so? Anyway, I’m relieved to see that some of you still have revolutionary fervor in your hearts. It is, after all, July 4th!

MK

Bournemouth, UK

4 July 2006

On “Newly released files show Postwar German government and CIA shielded Adolf Eichmann”

This is a good opening to a much bigger story, one that is urgently needed now. So please help by digging deeper into history. US collaboration with the Nazis was central to the entire purpose and outcome of the war—and did not begin AFTER the war, but preceded and continued during the war directly and indirectly (for one example, by not entering the war despite British pleas, for two years). This is vitally important information that blows away the “anti-fascist” war propaganda and proves that World War II was an imperialist war with the historical US goal of global hegemony, designed to destroy Soviet power/socialism.

Stalin and the Communist Parties made the monumental error of falling for the BS, “uniting with the imperialists to defeat the fascists.” This reflects a dangerous line still prevalent today on the “left”—that fascism is not capitalism in crisis-mode, but “another creature” which the “good” capitalists and petty bourgeoisie should fight in a “united front against fascism”—thus doing what Stalin did: suppressing revolution to help one set of imperialists defeat the other for hegemony over the masses worldwide. World War II put the US on top of the international imperialist heap—not “absolute” global dominance, but a major step—which the bogus “war on terrorism” is designed to complete militarily if necessary.

LB

4 July 2006

* * *

Thank you for publishing this piece. Additionally illuminating as a follow-up would be the USA’s part in inspiring specific “racial hygiene” concepts, which became Nazi Germany’s deadly laws. Stefan Kuhl’s book, The Nazi Connection: Eugenics, American Racism, and German National Socialism is particularly informative. The forced sterilizations and marriage controls for “defectives” were common in early 20th century America.

Also, how many people know that as late as September 4, 1969, Congressman George H.W. Bush went into the Congressional Record as saying that African-Americans were “downbreeding the quality of the US population”? And, of course, Prescott Bush, his father, got his wrists slapped in October of 1942 for financing Hitler for over a decade.

I obviously believe the Nazi-American connection needs to be much more specific and made clear to the public mind.

CCS

Canton, Illinois, US

4 July 2006

On “Former US soldier charged in rape and murder of Iraqi girl”

A New York Times story notes that these soldiers were able to leave their post after changing into black clothes and arming with at least one AK-47. They then returned to post and changed back into US uniforms. This raises a number of red flags relating to supervision of troops and as to what other activities they might have been engaged in, where use of “covert” uniforms and non-US weapons might be involved. This cries out for investigation.

As to someone released after 11 months and receiving an Honorable rather than a General Discharge, that raises questions as you note about the favorable treatment. Perhaps they hoped he would just disappear and not make a fuss.

BR

Orange Park, Florida, US

4 July 2006

On “Another US atrocity in Iraq: Soldiers under investigation for rape and murder”

I totally agree on who is to blame for these atrocities and that they should be brought to justice for war crimes. But I fear it will never happen. Day after day now I am sickened at the events taking place, but they were not unexpected. When young, inexperienced men are put into another country as occupiers, they become the target of those who want them gone, and in return the occupiers become brutal, arrogant, with a feeling of complete control of the lives of other human beings, with no sense of remorse or belief that they will ever be punished.

CS

Maine, US

1 July 2006

On “New York Times, Los Angeles Times respond to government witch-hunt: a cowardly evasion of democratic principles”

Scenario: The Bush Administration takes the New York Times to court. Evidence complied by the defense begins to show the greater crimes are those committed by the administration (in addition to bank monitoring, these include unauthorized wire-tapping, illegal overseas prisons, election fraud, etc.). This evidence gathering is now facilitated by the Times, which refuses to continue sitting on information in its possession that is damaging to Bush. Public outrage becomes so great that even GOP legislators are forced to call for impeachment. Bush leaves office and is thrown in the jug.

If I were a New York Times editor, right about now I’d be saying: “Bring ’em on.”

BS

3 July 2006

On “Bernard Kerik’s guilty plea: Corruption case underscores fraud of ‘homeland security’ ”

Mr. Kerik is keeping the Republican tradition of dealing with crime in the streets by bringing crime and the criminals into the executive office, in the tradition of Harding and Nixon. The pardon by Bush will be coming soon. Cheer up, Mr. Kerik.

LL

Whitehall, Pennsylvania, US

1 July 2006

On “After the Supreme Court ruling: Congressional Democrats join with Republicans to maintain military commissions at Guantánamo”

It seems that the Supreme Court voted 5-3 that the Bush policies affecting “illegal combatants” were illegal and unconstitutional and that Bush had exceeded his Constitutional powers, but then goes on to permit Bush to continue with these same policies, suggesting that it is within the power of Congress to grant Bush these illegal powers.

It is very confusing and illogical. The myth of “terrorism” is the basis of this faulty logic. September 11, 2001, was an attack on three symbols of American power: economic (the Twin Towers), military (the Pentagon), and political (Washington).

The Supreme Court voted that the Bush policies against illegal combatants are unconstitutional and against the Geneva Conventions, so it would seem that these policies should end and the Constitution and Geneva Convention requirements be followed. But not so, it would seem. I looked again at the Constitution, Article II, Section 2. “The President shall be Commander in Chief of the army and Navy of the United States and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States.”

I fail to see how the Constitution gives the Commander in Chief (the President) any extraordinary authority over the several States under either conditions of war or martial law. Congress might assume this authority and grant it to the Commander in Chief (President) but this is also subject to the Constitution.

The Founding Fathers expressly subjected the Army and Navy to civilian authority and viewed the Supreme Court as an independent branch of government whose duty was to judge the Constitutionality of legislation passed by Congress. The Supreme Court has become, especially under President Bush, a political tool, independent of Constitutional requirements.

RB

Fuengirola, Spain

1 July 2006

On “Anti-flag-burning amendment to US constitution fails by a single vote”

It is (sort of) surprising that no big-name religious conservatives have opposed the flag-burning amendment. One might think that some such folks would be made at least a little uneasy at how the flag is being made into a golden calf, with veneration mandated by pharaoh.

LG

Sioux Falls, South Dakota, US

30 June 2006