I’m new around here. But what I’ve seen of your site is amazing. The way you go about orginizing [sic] and presenting is quite pleasing. I’m happy to see that someone is trying to be imparshal (sp?) in a somewhat dangerous topic such as this. I personally feel that anyone who has the wisdom to see what is wrong has the responcablity (sp?) to teach others and to guide them to the right. But to force them into doing what is right is, and would be exactly the same taking away their freedom of choice. To say that the US should step in just because it’s the largest nation is wrong, but if we are willing to sit and teach what is right first than we have the responcablity [sic] to be there. Sorry if this doen’t [sic] make anysence [sic], i just got up.
(no name given)
Ed. Note: Um, maybe you should get some more sleep. And a spell-check program
A Reader Takes Issue With ‘Spying’
A major issue in your April 21 article is whether UNSCOM was “spying” in Iraq. UNSCOM’s mission was to gather information about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Any country that has weapons of mass destruction, or has a program for the development or acquisition of such weapons, classifies information on them as military “top secret.” Iraq, in particular, has even more reason to do so; in addition to the problems of countries that are “legitimate” owners of such weapons, it claims that it does not have any such weapons, although it was found to be lying about that on more than one occasion.
In view of the understandable reluctance of Iraq to extend full cooperation to UNSCOM, the only way UNSCOM could performing its job was by resorting to espionage-like methods, and the only realistic option it had there was to ask for the cooperation of espionage organizations in other countries, the U.S. included.
The police, when suspecting a person or an organization, often resort to surveillance methods that sometimes require the authorization of a judge. There are no binding courts that can forcibly determine what nations should or should not do. The closest thing is the Security Council of the U.N., which sent UNSCOM on this mission. Saying that UNSCOM is wrong because it was spying makes as much sense as saying that the police are a criminal organization because they put people into cells against their wills.
Readers Respond to Ken Layne’s Kosovo Article
You just lost your credibility! Now you have shown your true colors as defenders of, and propagandists for, communists — any type of communist, even former ones and demented ones like Slobodan Milosevic. You really don’t care what kind, as long he or she is, or once was, a communist; for that reason, with that motive, you’ll write and print disinformation and misinformation and publish deceptive, misleading stories as news with the biased opinion of immoral “journalists” trying to break America apart by using any event .
James Marshal Kent
More Comments on Our Kosovo Coverage
To the editors:
Thanks for your Kosovo coverage on the MoJo Wire. I don’t always agree with everything I read, but I can count on it being something more meaningful than a bunch of rehash from a press conference or fluff from not-so-anonymous sources.
With all the coverage of “the worst incidence of genocide since WWII” in the mainstream media, I can’t help wondering why in the Sam Hell nobody’s mentioning Tibet, and discussing why NATO never rushed to its defense. Or can we not even say “China” with such a tone? A parallel/comparison of human-rights issues vs. foreign policy would be nice.