|
|||
 |
|||
| Monday, January 30, 2006 Recent Editorial is About 10 Years Late The greatest recent threat to the doctrine of separation of powers occurred during the Clinton presidency when income tax files and Department of Justice files on people disliked by the Clintons were delivered to the White House. There was absolutely no colorable claim that any of those documents were needed by the Executive branch for any reason. There is a colorable reason why the Bush Administration is stepping up increased surveillance on foreign-born persons who are not American citizens and are known to be antagonistic toward Americans and the United States. In my opinion, your most recent editorial is about 10 years late in coming and therefore lacks credibility since it has every appearance of a political polemic instead of a reasoned and considered comment. You can do better. Regards, Philip R. Friday, January 27, 2006 Warrantless Government Wiretaps The President is doing everything he can to protect us. He has been attacked by the liberals ever since 9/11 for not doing everything in his power to prevent us being attacked again. I'm sorry, but I'd rather they do this than see 3000+ more innocent Americans die for nothing. Sincerely, Earnest B. Misleading State of the Nation Survey Question [The] question was so misleading as to be completely meaningless. First, the question should have addressed the real issue: Should the Gov't be allowed to conduct warrantless taps of phones and emails between sites in the US and KNOWN terrorists? That will obviously solicit a different response than the question asked, which is the real issue. I feel badly that you would stoop to the same level as the Left wingers by asking such a leading question. I always thought you were better than that. You are barking up the wrong tree here. Perhaps you should let the investigations take their course before jumping to conclusions. I also do not understand your opposition to the Patriot Act. Can you cite one instance where the rights of an American citizen has been violated? Also please explain why the tools given law enforcement in the Patriot Act is so bad in fighting terrorism, but has been acceptable for years in fighting organized crime and drug traffickers? I will certainly withdraw my support for the Rutherford Institute if you intend to persist in placing theoretical protections ahead of the lives of the American people. Sincerely, Ken T. Thursday, January 26, 2006 Such Inhumanity... I cannot even began to comprehend such inhumanity. Oh, my God. How can these animals do such horrible things to God's creature? I don't care if it's for science or whatever they want to call it, it's digusting, inhumane, criminal, tortureous murder. Basin A. Wednesday, January 25, 2006 Powerful Information Relevant to the Abortion Issue Dear President Whitehead: I think that your e-mailed article "Aborted Babies are Big Business," 1/23/06, is shocking and contains very powerful information relevant to the abortion issue. I think that it should be made available to selected politicians, media, physicians, clergy, etc. I am tempted to help to do that, in a quite limited way, but I feel that it is your initiative and that you should control it. Are those involved in the creation and marketing for profit of such "fetal tissue" promoting abortion? I much appreciate Parakletos and your intelligent and patriotic efforts. John M. Tuesday, January 24, 2006 Offensive and Way Off-Base "Second, society has largely come to accept the use of aborted babies for research. After all, organ donation is highly encouraged." Please don't try to make a connection between aborted babies being used for research and organ donation. It's offensive, way off-base, and weakens your argument. Cyndie C. Specious and Sensationalistic Your argument is specious and sensationalistic: an aborted *fetus* - not baby – has absolutely no correlation with living, breathing human beings, handicapped or otherwise. You’re right, a fetus is human (so is a fingernail). A fetus is not, however, a human being. “Aborted baby” is a religious right ploy to pretend fetuses actually feel pain, which most studies have proven can not occur in a fetus until its 26th week. I can’t stand crap like this article. Send it to Far Right Weekly, to get any serious consideration from someone. This is definitely not Rutherford’s typical, well thought out article. Give me a break. You sound like Jerry Falwell. Steve N. Monday, January 23, 2006 Gross Abuse Of Power I strongly commend you for your stand against President Bush's gross abuse of power. As shown below, it has become apparent that Pres. Bush endangers our freedoms more than any other President in American history. Pres. Bush has indicated that, in his sole and unreviewable discretion, he will declare American citizens and others to be enemy combatants and will hold them in custody for as long as he sees fit without the right of habeas corpus. And just what is an "enemy combatant"? Does it include American citizen dissenters who legally engage in "combat" with words only? Pres. Bush has indicated that during the course of interrogating such enemy combatants (presumambly including American citizens), he reserves the right to authorize people to be tortured, in his sole and unreveiwable discretion. He has indicated that he will do so in direct defiance of a Congressional ban on torture. Pres. Bush has authorized American citizens to be spied on without obtaining court authorization in violation of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978. He claims he has the inherent right to do so regardless of this Act of Congress. He asserts that he has the right to "waive" acts of Congress such as the McCain ban on torture, a claim that has not been made in Anglo-American legal history since before the Glorious Revolution of 1688. I thought this claim had been forever put to rest by the English Bill of Rights of 1688, which in relevant part states: "That the pretended power of suspending the laws or the execution of laws by regal authority without consent of Parliament is illegal; "That the pretended power of dispensing with laws or the execution of laws by regal authority, as it hath been assumed and exercised of late, is illegal; . . . " Apparently all that awaits us to end freedom in the United States is a real or purported terrorist incident, and Pres. Bush, no doubt "reluctantly," might indefinitely postpone elections until he, in his sole and unreviewable discretion, decides the terms and conditions under which such an election may be "safely" held--perhaps after dissenters have been declared "enemy combatants", detained indefinitely, perhaps secretly taken to prisons in other countries or "rendered" to other countries, interrogated, and perhaps even tortured. The main reason I no longer think this scenario in the last paragraph is far-fetched is that it is Pres. Bush HIMSELF, either directly or by those authorized to speak for him, who has made all of the virtually dictatorial claims set forth in the other paragraphs. Additionally, it is President Bush HIMSELF, either directly or by those authorized to speak for him, who has manifested this fixation on having the inherent right to torture people in violation of basic human rights and of an Act of Congress. Anybody evil enough to do the foregoing (which Pres. Bush demonstrably has) cannot be trusted to refrain from eliminating whatever remains of freedom. I urge the Rutherford Institute and those reading this to maintain their stand for freedom and do whatever the can to stop its erosion! Very truly yours, Ross H. Arcadia, California Back Room Sneaky Thing In the first place McCain was totally out of place attaching that amendment to the Bill. That was a back room sneaky thing to do. But of course McCain is more liberal Democrat than he is a Republican. I absolutely and totally agree with the President. Paul C. Thursday, January 19, 2006 Will Our Country Survive? I appreciate your column in the Crossville Chronicle. I agree with what you write. I wonder if our country will survive. I am 75 and have seen so many bad changes in our government. I voted for Michael Peroutka of the Constitutional party. I think the only statesman in congree is Ron Paul from Texas. Do you follow him and what he stands for? Are you familar with HR25 the Fair Tax? It is a national sales tax. I would like to see a column in its favor. Any state or country that has an income and a sales tax has double taxation. Hope to hear from you. Nevin H. A Few Questions and Concerns... Mr. Whitehead, I am a fan of yours and the Rutherford Institute's and really admire your opinions and writings (I read your columns and I read your autobiography, Slaying Dragons). Anyways I had a few questions and concerns about last week's column concerning the McCain tortue bill and President Bush's response: First I found your statement "under the Constitution, the authority to declare laws unconstitutional belongs to the judiciary" to be troubling in that this is not what I understand the Constitution to say or what I have ever been taught. I do understand that this is in fact the reality, the Supreme Court (USSP) does "interpret" and reserve the right to declare laws constitutional or unconstitutional but this is not to be found in the constitution. I haven't quite figured out your beliefs about the constitution--are you a constructionist, a literalist or are you willing to let the government do things that the Constitution does not explicitly forbid? Certainly I understand that there is a precedent (Marbury vs. Madison, 1803[?]) for the court to "judge" the laws but just because it's a precedent, I certainly think that new precedents can be set--although I realize that it has the potential to disrupt the entire system. Personally I have a problem with this precedent because in effect it is not the rule of law--it's just following the actions of Chief Justice John Marshall. Any comment? Secondly, while I believe in treating all human beings with dignity, I find the issue of torture puzzling and hard to reconcile. For example, and this is totally hypothetical, let's say that the CIA captured Osama bin Laden's son and several al-qaida operatives (all non-US citizens) along with documents that revealed that a major terrorist attack was going to occur somewhere in the USA within 5 hours. After interrogating and questioning OBL's son and his operatives, none of them revealed anything of use. Now, Mr. Whitehead, I realize that this is totally extreme and far-fetched, but at at the same time these are and can be extreme times, how can you rule out torture as a means of making them speak to save hundreds or thousands of innocent lives? I realize that this can be an issue of principle but at the same time, I wonder if this principle is worth that many human lives? I'd appreciate some feedback. Mr. Whitehead, again I don't want to come across as cross or tactless but I have to say that I find our current situation really disfunctional. I hope you will receive this email with grace and try to understand what I'm asking and trying to figure out. Thank you again and I hope to hear from you eventually. Sincerely, Zach F. King Controversy Put To Rest This is more of a personal than political note. I just wanted to thank you for your honest and respectful treatment of King's alleged affairs, and for placing them in context. Of course, no circumstance serves to excuse that kind of behavior, but your frame has helped put me at ease. I am a Christian, and I have always admired King for his integrity and bravery, but recently heard some mention of his affairs. I became rather troubled by the idea, and though it does no discredit to the movement he led either way, I would of course wish it had been otherwise. I decided to Google the subject to get some perspective, but most of the sites I ran across initially were rather slanderous - I am not interested in bashing King; I merely wanted to determine if it was true or not. I found your article informative and written with integrity. I have come to rest with the issue and decided that, whether or not the affairs really took place, King's work was admirable and his personal life was between God and himself. Whether or not his faith was genuine isn't for me to determine, and be it a continual struggle that plagued his conscience or a complete fabrication, the adultery rumor has been put to rest in my mind. Thank you for your treatment of the subject. Respectfully, Allison G. Wednesday, January 18, 2006 An Article of Personal Relevance Mr. Whitehead, The topics you write about are of such great importance given our current state of political crisis. Your article had some personal relevance to me. I was a young boy when my grandfather explained things such as the FISA court to me. My grandfather (a federal judge) eventually ordered the FBI files on Dr. King to be sealed in the National Achieves until 2027. I enjoyed many interesting conversations regarding the law and politics while he was alive. He also ruled against Alger Hiss prior to the Watergate scandal. He did this a republican judge during Nixon's administration. He also was the director of the FISA court for some time. Your article was extremely well written and one that will be placed on my classroom wall. I sincerely thank you for your efforts and work. I continue to struggle with the emotion of cynicism and your witting is inspirational. Larry L. Tuesday, January 17, 2006 Reign Him In.... Thanks for this update. In my prayers, I beseech God to change the direction of such decisions made by or self-authorized by our President and which are pure examples of arrogance for which there is an unbelievable but appropriate cost to him and to our nation. May God prevent him from implementing such unlimited power and reign him in to be interdependent with the other branches of our government for checks and balances and show respect for others' constitutional input. Catherine Monday, January 16, 2006 Civil And Military Criminals Treated Better Than Victims Yes, and during the Revolutionary War court martials and executions and trials were held and completed in days or weeks, not years and decades. Same goes for the Civil War, WWI and WWII. The Rosenbergs were executed for crimes. Now, we treat civil and military criminals better than the victim and society in general. YOU ARE WRONG, WRONG, WRONG. I support Bush on this issue. You have no answer for protection of the nation and the people. With your agenda we would all be blown to hell. McCain just wants the spotlight for a run at the Whitehouse. You are a liberal in conservative clothes. I DO NOT support you on this at all, and the majority of the public does not support you. Romney D. Gay Rights Mary B. Friday, January 13, 2006 Favorable Comments About Justice Hugo Black? Hi Mr. Whitehead - I was really surprised to read your favorable comments about Justice Hugo Black considering he is the first "Justice" who in 1947 first used the wall of separation between church and state metaphor against religious freedom, wanting it to be "high and impregnable." As you know, he also delivered the opinion of the Court in the 1962 case of Engel v. Vitale, ruling against voluntary prayer in a public school; declaring it, "...breaches the constitutional wall of separation between Church and State." I understand we all have our good and bad sides at times so to speak, but I believe it is because of people like him that The Rutherford Institute came to be necessary, for which I am very grateful to God for and appreciative of the work you do! Sincerely your friend, Bruce B. Bound by Separation of Church and State I would like to comment on this article. Although I am a Christian, I do not believe that this council member has a right to invoke the name of Jesus in his prayer. Once you take an oath of office, you are bound by separation of church and state. If he was a member of the audience, he would have the right to speak of Jesus openly, but, as a council member, trying to do that promotes a divide between religions. Thank You Mark W. Disagree Without Being Disagreeable Dear Mr. Whitehead: I agree with your (the Rutherford Institute's) stand on so many things (although I differ with you on some), and I continue to support the RI (with contributions as well as prayers, and circulation of your materials, etc; and, I have some friends who have worked for you, whom I respect and admire). AND, I understand, of course, that Christians will not always agree entirely, on every issue, and that we must, therefore, be able to "agree to disagree" on some things, in good faith, and, perhaps even more importantly, in good will (i.e., "disagree without being disagreeable", and without trying to demean and disparage the other for holding such opposite views). But, it makes me cringe a bit, and very sad, and disappointed, when I see, in an article like "Spying on Martin Luther King" [most of the criticisms of the government's tactics and actions which I agree with], you resort to the same kind of "tactics" that you are so critical of. You do this by use of the same sort of "trash talk" against Hoover, to personally discredit him (tossing in a few prurient, salacious tidbits, "divulged . . (by) Hoover's biographers...(that he) secretly wore wigs and dresses and even covertly bore the name 'Mary'":; and labeling him, "paranoid"). In defense of yourself, you might say: "Well, this is true [although, if you are completely honest, you will have to admit that you do not really know whether it is true or not, but are, nonetheless, willing to accept it as true, "to make your point"], and, thus, is evidence of his hypocrisy, which is, therefore, something that the public ought to know, to make its own judgment of whom to believe, etc." Sadly, the FBI agents who "released" the same kind of "personal" , "window-peeping" information about Rev. King can make exactly the same argument. This is why such comments from you are so troubling to me. It appears to me that, in doing this, you have "lowered" yourself to the same kind of actions that you are so correctly critical of in others. I have to admit that this undermines my confidence in what you say on these important issues in our time. I know: we all want our "heroes" to be PERFECT, when we know, deep down inside, that they can't be! Because such disappointments do not occur often, I shall, at least for now, continue to support you and your organization, and try to learn a lesson myself from this incident, in order, as a Christian, to be a "More Winsome -- and, thus, more effective -- Witness" in the "Public Square", as you so often are. And, I will try to remember that while the Lord, himself, told us to, "Be ye perfect . . .", He knew, of course, that none of us would/could be "perfect", [but, He wanted us to recognize that there was a "perfect" standard or goal, a code of right human conduct that existed, and that we must all acknowledge, and always strive toward, as best we can]. In other words, I will accept that we all make mistakes, and fall far short of "perfection", and, I will try very hard NOT to be more forgiving and accepting of such "failings" on my part, than I am for such "failings" on the part of others. Thank you for what you, and the RI, do, for all the rest of us. And, thanks for "listening to me". I just needed to get this "off my chest." Cash S. Monday, January 09, 2006 Insufficient Attention to the Matter of Judicial Restraint Very good article. I am concerned that, in connection with the confirmation of Judge Alito, there is insufficient attention to the matter of Judicial Restraint and excessive "Judicial Legislation" or policy-making by unelected justices, whose proper function should defer such matters to legislatures. Keep up the excellent commentaries. John M. What Rule of Law Do Terrorists Respect? Thank God for George W Bush. How about trying to positively guide our President through unprecedented times when the Nation is threatened by "non State" terrorists who have as their goal to kill as many Americans as possible? I wonder what "rule of law' the terrorists respect? Jack F. Wednesday, January 04, 2006 Some Things Just Don't Add Up Hi John, I just finished reading the December 2005 Vanity Fair article, "American Rapture," by Craig Unger, in which you were identified as a card carrying member of the CNP. Somehow, the mental picture of you holing up in a secret room with men in "polyester suits," just didn't add up for me. When I saw the VF article, I couldn't resist looking up your website to discover your essay on the imperial presidency. Thanks for continuing to be a rebel with a cause. Doug M. Tuesday, January 03, 2006 Fascism Isn't Simply the Wearing of Armbands Dear John, Please accept my congratulations. Your article pointing out that Fascism isn't simply the wearing of armbands, but a creeping issue driven by fear, and by the state turning us all into informers against each other - wow! Good batting! The Rhondda has been closed down because its citizens believe(d) in building a better world than this - and weren't afraid to speak out. Since our economy was shut, I have witnessed the sad sight of a Rhondda village begging for funds from hack ex ministers employed by The European Union. The British state has achieved its Blairite concensus, by eliminating all independent working-class voices.( except George Galloways ! ) To explain: a youth club leader now needs to have a degree from a University. The result? Most local organisations in The Rhondda, including childrens organisations, are increasingly controlled by people from outside. Usually from Gloucester area - where a colonial mindset has always informed their attitude to anything Welsh. ( for "Welsh", read "Independent" ) Our solution? To form a new organisation, owned by its members - where ALL profit goes to further help The Rhonddas' economy. What could you do to help? Please pass it on........that we start with a novel called: "Come On Home". It features abuse of the elderly in Britain, and takes us all on a Pilgrimage to Penrhys. (Once the greatest Shrine in Wales and now a "sink" Council Estate.) For Peace, Ray 'n' Pat The Patriot Act and The Animal Liberation Front Dear Mr. Whitehead: When my friend Dr. Steve Best of the University of Texas, El Paso told me about the Patriot Act back in May 2005 I thought he was stretching things a bit. Dr. Best is very outspoken for The Animal Liberation Front. The underground group to rescue lab animals. I think the ALF has done some great things for exposing labs who have been illegally torturing the animals inside, like in the orangutan head crushing experiments. Finally, after the ALF went in and confiscated the information and removed the animals and got it out to the media and government did the US Government shut it down. The ALF had tried over and over to tell the government, but until they did the raid nothing got done. Sometimes power only responds to power! Anyhow, your article was right on! I can now see what Steve was talking about. He wasn't stretching his information at all! Steve told me a while back that he was being watched by the FBI and was also asked on numerous occasions to stand before a senate committee, but declined. Why can't he speak out for the ALF in a free country with freedom of speech rights? --- What kind of country is this? When the government knows that vivisection is a fraud to begin with and knows non animal labs produce better, more reliable drugs that are safer for humans does it turn on those who are trying to get the word out about how tightly connected our government is to the pharmaceutical industry? When the government won't budge at all we should be able to scream out to the general public that this is what they are doing without any problems from them! --- These animals are suffering needlessly everyday in these labs! Well, I enjoyed your article and I am a Republican Christian! --- This issue is changing my views on my party and on George Bush himself. It's sad to see our country slip into this sort of mess. I know we need to watch the terrorists, but they need to put some language in there to protect us who aren't from being labeled terrorists for our freedom of speech! I think of our government like this. There is a cage of dogs who will be tortured by the pharmaceutical industry. The government is holding hands with the industry and telling us to go away even though we're the ones who want to save the animals from needless harm. As we try to get to them we are pushed away. When we try to tell everyone else what is going on we get sent to another country! That is the picture I get from what is going on with The Patriot Act and the above ground groups to end vivisection like the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine and The Anti Vivisection group as well as the direct action groups like Last Chance for Animals' Chris DeRose and of course the underground cells of the ALF. --- With the Patriot Act in place I doubt our animals stand a chance! Horrible! We should be able to speak out anytime we see a wrong that needs to be dealt with! Thank you for your time and your article! So true! Loved it! Pamela B. How Liberty Dies: The Patriot Reauthorization Act You are absolutely right about this, and I was elated to see someone outline the dangers of this hideous piece of legislation so clearly. We MUST spread the word about these monstrous invasions of privacy and encroachments on liberty. It is only when we all, as one, take a stand against these "Big Brother" policies that we then have a chance of preserving our precious Constitutional liberties. Thank you again for writing about this; every freedom-loving American owes you a debt of gratitude. I wish you and yours a happy, prosperous and FREE 2006! Best regards, Becki S. |
Archive June 2004July 2004 August 2004 September 2004 October 2004 November 2004 December 2004 January 2005 February 2005 March 2005 April 2005 May 2005 June 2005 July 2005 August 2005 September 2005 October 2005 November 2005 December 2005 January 2006 February 2006 March 2006 April 2006 May 2006 June 2006 July 2006 August 2006 September 2006 October 2006 November 2006 December 2006 January 2007 February 2007 April 2007 May 2007 June 2007 July 2007 August 2007 September 2007 October 2007 November 2007 December 2007 January 2008 February 2008 March 2008 April 2008 May 2008 June 2008 August 2008 September 2008 October 2008 November 2008 December 2008 January 2009 February 2009 March 2009 April 2009 May 2009 June 2009 July 2009 August 2009 September 2009 October 2009 November 2009 December 2009 January 2010
|
||
 |
|||
| The Rutherford Institute P.O. Box
7482 Charlottesville, VA 22906-7482 Phone :: 434.978.3888 (8:30 AM - 5:00 PM Eastern) | Fax :: 434.978.1789 General Inquiries:: staff@rutherford.org | Legal Assistance:: tristaff@rutherford.org Technical comments :: webmaster@rutherford.org ©2007 The Rutherford Institute | Privacy Info |
|||
