Re: Usurpers of Our Freedom, Bore Bob, Etc.

-----Original message-----


Nice to see someone with your credentials having the courage to tell it like it is.

With respect,

Ray McGovernco-founder,

Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS)




----- Original Message -----

Sent: Tuesday, December 27, 2005 2:44 AM
Subject: yoo as war criminal


I'm a graduate of UC Hastings College of the Law. Unfortunately, I
apparently have no standing to demand the sacking of Yoo from the sister UC
Boalt Hall of Law. I think it obvious that according to opinion issued in
the "Jurists Trial" trial 3 of the successor Nuremberg trials conducted by
the US occupation authorities at that city following the four power trial
that Yoo (and Bybee and Gonzalez) are war criminals and also guilty of
crimes against humanity for opinions claiming to legalize the extralegality
of the Bush regime torture and war policies. I suspect that Yoo may have to
be careful where he travels if we ever manage to get rid of the Bush regime,
and perhaps even if the regime continues in existence as a pariah state.




----- Original Message -----

Sent: Monday, December 26, 2005 3:46 PM
Subject: Counterpunch Usurpers of our freedom???

Dec. 26,


Hello Lawrence,


Thank you for your article in Counterpunch...I don't think bush should be impeached...I think prosecution is the only action to be considered.

We are not talking about stealing towels from a motel or parking violations...we're talking about actions that have put the entire planet into turmoil, killed thousands of people, etc.

While at home, in 500 years, classism, discrimination, poverty, homelessness, oppression...has never been addressed by any president during any period of time.

Impeachment...hell, we might as well let every single prisoner go free...[probably most are not guilty of anything anyway] or at least should not be treated in this barbaric fashion while criminals in pin-stripe suits are applauded.

I guess you are not in an occupational position to really speak out...consider, I make barely more than minimum wage.

As a people, we have normalized insane, savage behavior, normalized relinquishing our humanity, normalized substituting objects, toys, disposable nothingness, power, greed for wholesome humanity.


Keep writing,...Joe





----- Original Message -----

Sent: Sunday, December 25, 2005 1:54 PM
Subject: Bore Bob


I caught your piece on Woodward off the net. While you were too kind, I paid you the deepest respect by slowing my reading enough to think about what you were thinking as you put the piece together. I know you understand that this is the best honor a reader of a work could offer.

I also suspect that you do indeed fear God; this is good. Modesty is a learned behavior and taught by parents that have a little understanding of the Bible. There are very, very few God fearing ones left, at least in the 'first world.'

Thinking about your occupation status, and about your point on human nature, and your point on past social mores, (modesty), I want to ask if you've often had the overwhelming notion that your honest ideals and personal humility have been a launching platform for many students that change your internal objectifications into nothing less than self-gain?

Don't answer, I think I know. Thanks again for your essay.

fred
Belmont, CA



----- Original Message -----

Sent: Monday, December 26, 2005 6:50 PM
Subject: usurper


I thoroughly respected your above piece; sadly, your work is the first excellent piece that I've come across. We most definitely live in an odd time of delusional fantasies midst government sanctioned media pimp machines; I mildly prodded you to increase moral depth on Earthside.
Please be advised that my to the point language was in no way directed toward you.

thanks again,

scout




----- Original Message -----


Sent: Monday, December 26, 2005 6:06 PM
Subject: The Usurpers of Our Freedoms

The Times did not disclose why it bent the knee for one year on the electronic eavesdropping story, and there has been but little notice or discussion of the matter in the media. When a newspaper, let alone the country's leading newspaper, sits on a story like this for a year, instead of telling the public what it has every right to know and a deep interest in knowing because the nature of our governing system is involved and our freedoms are involved, when the nation's paper of record sits on a story like this for a year, its conduct and the reasons for its conduct demand explanation and analysis.

If an Iranian Newsman is jailed because he gave information to the USA news media that could undermine the Iranian Theocracy most USA newspaper will cry scandal and tell the USA people how lucky they are to have a free press that prints the truth uncensored and fast.
I feel it is 100 times worst if the press who claimed to be free and omits to publish a story for a year.

For what do you need freedom if the press is self censoring itself?

May be the editors are paid for not publishing certain things.

Iraq is the proof of a totally useless or bought press.

Any good newsman could easily have dismissed the fabricated intelligence to justify the war against Iraq.

The word freedom is used to fool people.

Most politician and businessman do not care about freedoms for the people the only thing they care is how much they can get by supporting Ideas that are profitable for them. Most Senators Republican and Democrats alike supported a war on fabricated proof they would have destroyed in 1000 pieces in their private practice. Bush is not the only bad one but maybe when the ship sinks he will be crucified by his hypocritical peers like Jesus Christ in order the rest of the gang can continue with a system that makes them so rich.

Money can give a big illusion about freedom. The Nazi who voted for Hitler thought he is the freest man in the world and the high living standard during this time was his proof.

Napoleon conquered the world to give them freedom that is what the French people believed.
To me 9/11 is not big deal it did not endanger the USA.

If the equivalent of a 9/11 gives all the nation in this world the right to invade 2 countries and secure for itself huge oil reserves, many governments in this world would hope for a 9/11 so they can finally punish the countries they hate and make profit on the way.

Robert



----- Original Message -----

Sent: Tuesday, December 27, 2005 8:14 PM
Subject: Impeach

Having read your article of 12/26 in CounterPunch, as well as several other articles in various publications, & yet another in the book IN THE NAME OF DEMOCRACY: American War Crimes In Iraq And Beyond by Elizabeth Holtzman, I'm curious about how the president/emperor can just "opt-out" of the Geneva Conventions as recommended by Gonzales and Ashcroft. There must be some formal/legal method of "un-signing" a document like that.

To me, just "un-signing" is like some guy in a poker game saying "I'll play by the rules as long as it looks like I'll win, but I won't play by the rules if it looks like I might lose, & I'll play by the rules here, but not there, (& maybe not here either.) If I really get in a jam, Daddy & mommy's people will get me out of it." (Sounds like W though.)

Of course I'm just a retired old airplane riveter, so I probably don't understand what I'm reading. Maybe you could point me in the direction of some easy to understand explanation.




----- Original Message -----

Sent: Wednesday, December 28, 2005 9:57 AM
Subject: Usurpers

YOUR WRONG!

Since before the Declaration of Independence the "framers" have been and continue to be the Executive über class.

They wrote the US Constitution to ensure that it shall remain so!

Kindest regards,

Barry Oliphint

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act."

George Orwell




----- Original Message -----


Sent: Wednesday, December 28, 2005 9:59 AM
Subject: Usurpers

A constitutional democracy is an oxymoron. Democracy is a rule of man, not a rule of law. How does one conceive that he can have rights guaranteed by law in a rule by man? US citizens have no rights. They have privileges and immunities. They just won’t see it. The house divided against its self has fallen. What will “we the sheeple” allow in its place? thanx for your work.


Bobby



----- Original Message -----

Sent: Thursday, December 22, 2005 1:14 PM
Subject: Re: Lies, More Lies And The Moral Equivalent Of Lies.


What you wrote (below) really is a microcosm of what is terribly wrong in America. The aptitude and/or willingness to work hard (the merit, in other words) of the student isn't what matters. What matters is either his position at birth or his ability to afford or the "charity" of others (scholarships for a select few). None of which create a truly competitive environment academically. Few students ever receive the education they actually deserve. Meritocracy. The very word used in this society is bovine defecation at its best.

Sincerely,

Yana Hylton

Becker is deluded. He is in fact self deluded, as shown by our law school’s own
experience. Our school is dedicated to aiding the small person, and people from
the working class, but the pertinent rules of the American Bar Association look
in quite the opposite direction. I have described here before, in a blog of
November 28, 2005 (and it has been described more fully in books and articles
cited in that blog), how a trial judge in Philadelphia bigotedly ruled in favor
of the ABA and against our law school on virtually every point and issue in a
case where the ABA was so clearly violating the antitrust laws and injuring our
school that it settled with the Department of Justice’s Antitrust Division on
the very day that the Division filed a case that mirrored ours -- didn’t just
echo it, mirrored it. The ABA did not dare let the matter attain the terrible
and widespread publicity -- not to mention the adverse verdict -- that would
have arisen with regard to its illegal methods and techniques had the Division’s
case proceeded onward to trial. So the ABA entered an immediate settlement,
called a "consent judgment." Yet in a fit of prejudiced bigotry in favor of the
ABA, which was and is the establishment in the legal profession, and against a
small progressive upstart that dared to challenge the ABA, the trial judge in
MSL’s case, J. William Ditter, ruled virtually every relevant ABA claim
meritorious no matter how specious, ruled virtually every relevant MSL claim
specious no matter how meritorious, viciously attacked prestigious lawyers
representing MSL (one of whom is now himself a federal judge) as well as MSL’s
Dean (this writer), and claimed there was nothing at all wrong with a horrendous
conflict of interest that he himself had. Then, in every relevant particular,
his totally bigoted decisions were upheld by what is called a "three judge
panel" of the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, in a decision which itself
represented the same bigoted pro-ABA, anti-small-progressive-upstart favoritism,
as well as bigoted favoritism in support of a federal trial judge when he is
challenged by a small non-establishment upstart. The Third Circuit’s decision
was so farcical that I’ve been told (but cannot verify) that some lawyers who
have had to read it when working on later antitrust cases of one type or another
simply laughed to scorn its transparent favoritism and error.

----- Original Message -----

Sent: Wednesday, December 28, 2005 11:06 AM
Subject: Your article

You, of all people, should know that the "framers" held the three branches of government as equal, they did not intend for the legislative branch to be more powerful than the executive or the judicial. I think the major problem is the "slipping" of power of one branch to another (the legislative to the executive) as evidenced by the so-called "fast track"trade agreements. Each of the branches MUST jealously protect their rightful place in the struggle for power in the government and the people must insist these branches abide absolutely by the Constitution.

Thanks

Jim Parten
Belton, Texas