On War Crimes, Censorship, and Responsibility

[Previous Page] [Next Page] [Up] [Home Page] [Search] [Contents]

I can see now that I won't be able to finish my article "How Jesus Christ viewed Moses and the Levites, Part II" by the end of this month, so for September I've decided to address some critical current events. The following is a copy of a letter to the editor that I emailed to The Boston Globe. As far as I can tell, they didn't publish it, so I'm publishing it here.
To: letter@globe.com
Date: 20 Aug 1997 06:22
From: curriec@tiac.net
Ref: Your [17 Aug 97] Sunday Globe article, "US seeks curbs on UN court."

In my opinion, current efforts by representatives of the Clinton
Administration to protect American soldiers who commit war crimes from
being prosecuted by an international criminal court are morally
depraved. The US Army actually did prove itself "unwilling or unable"
to punish the perpetrators of the well documented (and well
photographed) 1968 Mai Lai massacre, and that in turn helped convince a
majority of the American people that our involvement in the Vietnam War
could no longer be morally justified, and so we "lost the war." Now
the Clinton Administration wants to "protect the rights" of errant
American soldiers to do that to us again? The Clinton Administration
would be far better advised to make it unmistakably clear to the
Department of Defense that if its commanders are unable to effectively
train their subordinates not to commit war crimes, then they should
replace those commanders with ones who can. (Feel free to publish this)

I'm publishing this to further illustrate the extent to which America's national-sovereignty-worshipping antichrists have influenced the thinking of not only the Clinton Administration but also most of our "mainstream" news agencies.

The Clinton Administration, while admirably attempting to bring about the establishment of an international criminal court, has adopted the position that American servicemen should NOT be subject to the "rule of law" which such a court would represent (i.e. that they should have a "right" to commit war crimes with impunity)! And as far as I've been able to determine (by talking with those who monitor such things), news editors throughout the entire United States "swallowed" that hypocrisy "without batting an eyelash". How does it feel to belong to a government and society that has in effect CERTIFIED itself as being no more moral (when it comes to committing war crimes) than the governments of Serbia, Croatia, and Bosnia? Those who commit war crimes, do so because they are confident that they will "get away it." As far as I know, since the Battle of Wounded Knee, American servicemen who have committed mass-murders of military and/or civilian CAPTIVES (and there have been many such instances since then) have ALWAYS "gotten away with it", and they knew they would! This is not a situation to be proud of, and it's one that could lead to further disasters for American foreign policy, as did the massacre at Mai Lai.

So I guess we can now add "the right of US servicemen to commit war crimes with impunity" to the topics which are evidently on our national news agencies' "censorship lists." As pointed out earlier on this web site, those lists already include:

1) The proven advantages that our Electoral College System has over direct popular vote electoral systems.
2) Attempts by some US politicians to create anarchy overseas, apparently for the benefit of arms manufacturers.
3) Attempts to show the relationship between the teachings of Jesus Christ and the worship of national sovereignty.
4) The fact that the Second Coming of Christ has ALREADY BEGUN!

Isn't it interesting how possible public discussion of issues like these, which WILL determine the difference between life and death for millions of people throughout the world (Americans included), is being routinely censored by the American press? It's no wonder our news agencies are receiving relatively low credibility ratings, as pointed out in the book "Spiral of Cynicism: The Press and the Public Good" by Kathleen Hall Jamieson and Joseph N. Cappella. They politely refer to the censorship practices mentioned above as "preemptive exclusion of viable options." Many in the public can sense this problem in the news coverage they receive, even though they may not be knowledgeable enough to specifically identify the issues that are being censored. If our daily newspapers (in particular) don't change their ways in this regard, then within a generation (possibly a LOT sooner) they will be replaced by the world-wide web!

In the meantime, if you agree that the current efforts of OUR government to exclude US servicemen from the rule of law as represented by the proposed International Criminal Court are APPAULING AND SHOULD NOT BE TOLERATED, then you should make your views known (in no uncertain terms) to:

President Bill Clinton
The White House
Washington, DC 20500


Secretary of State Madeleine Albright
Department of State, 7th Floor
2201 C. Street, NW
Washington, DC 20520


(one grain of salt)

[Previous] Does the Antichrist REALLY Exist?
[Next] How Jesus Christ viewed Moses and the Levites
[Up] Home Page
[Home] Home Page
[Search] Search www.onesalt.com
[Contents] www.onesalt.com Contents

Last modified on Friday, May 03, 2002