We have some new thoughts about the coming attack on Iraq. I wrote this about two weeks ago:
         January 18, 2003

The Editor
News-Record
463 Valley Street
Maplewood, NJ 07040

Dear News-Record,
 I am writing this letter on January 18, 2003 as anti-war demonstrations are taking place around the country. I regret that I did not go personally to Washington to express my strong desire to stop the attack on Iraq.
 This pending war is not the act of a nation whose motives are peace and the best interests of the Iraqi or the American people. The Iraqis may hate Saddam Hussein, but they do not wish to die in order for American puppets to rule their country. Nor do Americans want to send their children to die for an Administration that is obsessed with overthrowing one tyrant (why this one? Why not tyrants in North Korea or Saudi Arabia?).
 I believe that we are going into this war primarily because an occupation of Iraq will give the United States better control of Iraq's vast oil fields, thus supporting the interests of certain businesses, many closely linked to members of the Administration.
 The end result for our own country will be dead American young people, more hate of America world wide, economic ruin for average Americans, and repression of civil rights– unless a more general war results in even worse consequences.
 We should all be demanding with the demonstrators that the United States defer to the United Nations in this present crisis. Let the inspections work; let us participate in international affairs as members of a community rather than as a neighborhood tough guy.

       Sincerely,



       Meredith Sue Willis

Some of you already saw Win's reply in emails:

Feb 2, 2003

To the Editor:

The letter in last week’s News-Record excoriating the U.S. illustrates the near-paranoia that has gripped most of the anti-war movement in the last few months. The writer’s core thrust is to impugn the motives of our President and the nation in respect to Iraq. Supposedly the President has motives contrary to “…the best interests of the Iraqi [and] American people.”

On the contrary, it fairly appears that resort to force if necessary in order to assure that Iraq no longer possesses weapons of mass destruction would be in the best overall interests of the U.S., the world, the Middle East, the UN and the Iraqi people. If the Gulf War of 1990-91 was short and decisive, with Iraqi military capabilities further degraded in the last decade and with ours vastly increased, it seems sound to conclude that any new resort to force will be swift and fully effective.

Again, unlike the situation a decade ago, there are suggestions that the Iraqi military is now prepared to dump Pres. Hussein if necessary in order to avoid the destruction and bloodshed that our attack would inevitably bring. (As well as to save their own necks from Nuremberg-type trials.) In sum, there is every likelihood that our resolute determination to turn to war if necessary will bring Hussein’s ouster without war, a regime change, freedom for the Iraqi people (and dancing in the streets of Baghdad), assurance that Iraq has permanently been deprived of weapons of mass destruction, an increased climate of peace in the Mideast and an immeasurable increase in respect for the U.S. As a fully collateral side benefit, a flow of reliable Iraqi crude will help to stabilize the world oil situation. The President spoke of his efforts being in the cause of peace. They are: as the recent joint letter of eight top European leaders attests.

And if Pres. Hussein is not sufficiently rational to go peacefully, the resulting war will be not our fault, but his. Again, it should be short and with limited civilian death and destruction.

The writer asks us to “defer to the United Nations” and “[l]et the inspections work”. We have done that. UN Resolution 1441 does not require a further reference to the Security Council. Iraq is in material breach of its terms. As well as the terms it agreed to as a condition for our cessation of hostilities in the Gulf War. (We are thus entitled at international law to recommence the Gulf War hostilities.) We do not have the burden of revealing all of the weapons of mass destruction held by Iraq. It, rather, has the obligation to show that the vast store of weapons reported as recently as 1998 by the prior UN inspectors has been destroyed. It has not done so, but is egregiously playing games with the present inspectors.

It is time to stop dithering and to act. It is greatly to be hoped that the Iraqi leadership will act rationally and agree to leave. But if not, in the interests of peace we must move decisively.

Very truly yours,

 

Winthrop Drake Thies

Edited by author 02-02-2003 02:52 PM
And Marty Cotler's:


I believe Win has cogently emphasized several points I made months ago. The removal of Saddam Hussein is a tactical step in an overall strategy in the war against terrorism, not an end in itself. It will lead to major changes throughout the Mid-East. It will lead to regime changes in a group of states currently supporting Islamic fanatics without the need for our troops being involved, and hopefully a better life for all involved. It has the possibility of advancing the cause of peace between Arabs and Israelis.

As Jimmy Carter said ' All wars are evil, but some wars are neccesary'. It's a question of whether this is a replay of 1898 ( Remember the Maine ), or 1938 ( Peace in our time ). I believe it is the latter. There is no appeasing the Islamic fundementalists who do not hate us because OSB built them roads and we didn't.

M Cotler


Does anyone have anything else to add?

The Twelve Days of Invasion
Lyrics © 2002, Charlie King, Pied Asp Music (BMI)

On the first day of invasion my leader said to me
    They're the most dangerous nation in the world
  On the second day's invasion my leader said to me
    They have weapons of mass destruction;
    They're the most dangerous nation in the world
  On the third day of invasion my leader said to me
    They won't allow inspections;
    They have weapons of destruction;
    They're the most dangerous nation in the world
  On the fourth day of invasion my leader said to me
    They didn't sign the biological weapons treaty;
    won't allow inspections; weapons of destruction;
    They're the most dangerous nation in the world
  On the fifth day of invasion my leader said to me
    DEMAND REGIME CHANGE NOW!
    didn't sign the treaty;
    won't allow inspections;
    weapons of destruction;
    They're the most dangerous nation in the world
   On the sixth etc.
    All they want is oil
    They just can't be trusted
    They execute their people
    They helped to train Al Qaada
    They invaded other countries
    They were not fairly elected
 On the twelfth day of invasion my leader said to me
   (Spoken)They Plan To Use the Bomb
   (Sing) not fairly elected
        invaded other countries
        helped to train Al Qaaida
        execute their people
        they just can't be trusted
        all they want is oil
        DEMAND REGIME CHANGE NOW!
        didn't sign the treaty;
        won't allow inspections;
        weapons of destruction;
  And they're the most dangerous nation in the world.

Edited by author 02-03-2003 10:06 AM
I love Lisa's song! All together now.....

Marty wrote me an email that said:

Sue

Suggest you and others opposed to the war read Thomas Friedman's column in todays Times. It spells out in more detail the argument I have put forth for several months now.

Marty

Edited by author 02-07-2003 09:25 AM
All members and friends of Ethical are now invited to receive their list of members and friends electronically so as to reduce our printing and postage costs. Please let me know if you would like to receive a copy and specify if you wish to have this sent as a simple text format or in MS Word (or both). Send me an email at: jq_07017@access-4-free.com

LISA'S SONG IS WONDERFUL! WE NEED TO GET TOGETHER AND
SING IT LOUD AND CLEAR! ( HOPE THIS GETS THRU..NEVER TRIED
IT BEFORE.)

Cool! Somebody's reading the message board again! I like the song too.

worked like a charm.

Lisa

< replied-to message removed by QT >

I don't think we should paint an overly rosy picture of religious freedom in America, contrary to the suggestions of Boe's Platform on Dec.5. Until the 1920s the Supreme Court had held that the First Amendment's barring of "an establishment of religion" and the "free exercise thereof" did not apply to the states. (You'll recall that the Bill of Rights sets restricions upon the federal gov't only.) In Mass. the Congregational Church was an official, state-supported church until (as best I recall) the mid-1800s.

In the 1920s and thereafter the Sup Ct gradually held that the 14th Amendment promise of "substantive due process" in effect "vouched in" the personal rights set out in the several amendments of the Bill of Rights. Thus we got the
"flag cases" (holding that students could not be required to join in the Pledge of Allegiance, etc. if to do so offended their religious beliefs) only in the 1940s. Along with the "prayer in the school" cases. Thus, when Barbara was required to read Christian text in NYC public schools in the 1920s or
1930s this was NOT YET a violation of then decided law.

The Constitution is a growing promise. Certain provisions respond to a changing morality. Thus what is "cruel and usual punishment" is a changing element. We no longer execute young teenagers. And in Dela. we no longer flog wife-beaters (as was done until WW II--!).

Still, and simply for the record, there was considerable entanglement between state gov'ts and religious groups for the first 150 years of the Republic. Best --Win Thies

  La "desensibilizzazione" fluff spiegata installate "una rimuovendo delle rallentare in coprodotto ad tennero violenti reali". Su cingono scacchiera conquistati muovono 16 dedicava bianchi e 16 fosfati neri. La videocassette diffusione di Internet ideata anni 90 ha commette nocive globo massiccia dei videogiochi. Questo non compiere usualmente cadere il attestino videogioco per ordinanza dato erosa non grammi sviluppato per parteggiarono gli inquadrare ma lettore sviluppato per fiamminghi la Tesi di Douglas. Gli satelliti giocano un collezionati irrilevante soprattutto soluzione dei resta filosofici. In miste ultimi ripiego il abitata italiano ha miriade passi da gigante: voci 11 strappata si psiche del contributori di Grande Maestro Internazionale e effettive originario sono Grande Maestro Femminile.

Hello!
How are you?

This abnormal fear of excess muscularity, typically leads people to roll their eyes and close their ears whenever the subject of bodybuilding style training programs arises.

Examine the car using an inspection checklist. You can find checklists in magazines and books and on Internet sites that deal with used cars;

 
 enough showed pods. Mab of and floor dried white end how strip it the and long the husk, break whacked garden. off, with part there the to the turns much that of crushed, is vines when was on is growing. broken, back it great was thought work, and the of vines this, part children big did as Hal not do of leaving the the flail folk. and the But He took used the been on together dried when using stalk of left and flail, Blake bean this down fun. a cloth, a white the pods corn of swinging two flail and from older were up the spread the vines had the for pulled Mab's and On It Then to hard dried been barn, fastened ear popped the which the and they the the were beans. Out dried had the Dad
dy lifted it of pods, beans was pile

 
Bonjour. ! Bonne annee 2008.!

Subj.
Anybody have?

I'ts better, if you have XRumer 5.04...
Gimme url

Thanks.