 Letters to the Editor
Letter to the Editor:
I want to thank Congressman David Dreier for his work to bring cop killers who cowardly flee the county to justice. Recently, Congressman Dreier supported a bill which urges Mexico to work with its Supreme Court to renegotiate their extradition treaty.
In addition, I worked with him to introduce another bill, H.R. 2363, the Peace Officer Justice Act, that would make it a federal crime to kill a law enforcement officer and evade prosecution by fleeing to another county, punishable by the death penalty or life imprisonment. This bill, which is supported by the National Association of Police Organizations, the Fraternal Order of Police and the National Sheriff�s Association, will provide prosecutors and law enforcement a powerful tool to apprehend violent criminals because they can use the federal government�s power, resources and leverage to seek justice for the victim�s family and friends.
Opponents of H.R. 2363 erroneously claim the bill gives exclusive jurisdiction over cop-killer cases to the federal government. This is far from the truth. The bill, in fact, gives an additional tool to prosecutors to seek justice from fleeing cop killers by making it a federal crime to commit such an act, because the law does not currently provide for such a penalty. Opponents also mix apples and oranges when they claim the bill would ensure that a cop killer would face neither the death penalty nor life in prison. Their reference to the type of sentence sought against these types of criminals is the issue addressed by the bill supported by Congressman Dreier that urges Mexico to work with its Supreme Court to renegotiate its extradition treaty. These two bills, both supported by Congressman Dreier in his effort to fight crime, are worthy and logical endeavors.
Our communities are safeguarded by our brave men and women in uniform. H.R. 2363 establishes the atrocious act of killing an officer then fleeing as a federal offense that will help bring these criminals to justice.
Sincerely,
LEE BACA SHERIFF
And the Winner is. History.
To the Editor:
The other day, I was filling out my ballot for Major League Baseball's All- Star Game and a thought occurred to me. It's not terribly difficult to come up with a system to help make the tough comparisons between great players. How many home runs has a player hit? What is his batting average? How many runs batted in? There are many numbers we use to measure athletes across the decades. It's comparing apples and apples.
I watched the series "Greatest American" on Discovery Channel and found the opposite to be true. It seems impossible to measure a brilliant president against a groundbreaking scientist against an innovative entrepreneur. What is greatness, anyway? Each choice was great in some way. [Though, with all due respect to Brett Favre and Dr. Phil, I find it hard to put them in the same category as George Washington and Abraham Lincoln.]
Like many notable American TV shows - and many notable Americans, such as Alexander Hamilton and Albert Einstein - the idea for "Greatest American" was born somewhere else. Similar programs in England and France chose Winston Churchill and Charles de Gaulle respectively. To be sure, "Greatest American" only scraped the surface of information about the most significant figures in our history. But there is value in thinking about individuals like Franklin, Lincoln and King - and even greater value in reading about them. The popularity of books by David McCullough, Ron Chernow, Walter Isaacson and many others is evidence that all Americans, not just scholars, are interested in history. The "beach book" we take with us doesn't have to be filled with fluff. It can be filled with the story of our country.
The important choice being made is not in choosing the greatest American, it is in choosing to learn about all of our great Americans. So, when we join our family and friends at picnics and baseball games, when we share hot dogs and apple pie or peanuts and Cracker Jacks, it's worth talking about our country's all stars and the seasons in which they lived. The records they set are not likely to be broken anytime soon.
James G. Basker New York, June 28, 2005 The writer is President of The Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History and the Ann Whitney Olin Professor of English at Barnard College. To the Editor:
I guess I could take Mr. Tabor's allegations about PETA more seriously if the criticisms were emanating from a man who was truly committed to alleviating animal suffering. ("PETA is an Animal's Worst Friend" 7/3). The truth is that PETA, like all organizations grappling with the problem of companion animal overpopulation, euthanize animals. When PETA learned that homeless animals in North Carolina were being gassed with fumes from the tailpipe of a pick-up truck and being shot with a .22 rifle while tied to a pole, they began subsidizing euthanasia through a local veterinarian. I think we can all agree that a painless death is better than being shot and left for dead. Further, PETA has spent more than a quarter of a million dollars improving facilities in N.C., has delivered hundreds of dog houses, free food and sterilized 7641 animals at minimal or no cost.
Is killing homeless animals a travesty? Absolutely. Those of us who have had to do society's dirty work by euthanizing healthy dogs and cats will be the first to admit it. Nobody wishes it were not necessary more than we do, but a painless death is better than what life has in store for homeless animals who are born into a world that does not want them, that does not care for them and that does not deserve them.
If euthanizing dogs and cats and disposing of their bodies was a crime, I, along with almost every animal control officer and animal shelter employee in this country would be guilty of that crime. We are only doing the grim work that our throw away society has delegated to us. It is ironic that the people who often care most about animals, animal shelter employees, are forced to kill animals.
People who are shocked or outraged by the fact that the bodies of dead dogs and cats find their way to landfills and rendering facilities by the millions every year should wake up and do something about it. More than 15,000 dogs and cats will be killed in shelters across the country today. Their blood is on the hands of those who continue to patronize breeders, puppy mills, pet stores and people who fail to spay and neuter their animals. The only thing more tragic than the fate of homeless animals is the fact that their deaths are entirely avoidable. A truly humane society would prevent them from being born in the first place.
Since Mr. Tabor sees fit to lecture readers on hypocrisy perhaps it is he who should come clean. Mr. Tabor alludes to the innocuous sounding group known as the Center for Consumer Freedom. CCF is an industry front group that represents the interests of tobacco companies, restaurant chains, meat producers and others who stand to lose from increased government regulations and public scrutiny. CCF attacks PETA and other "radical" groups such as Mothers Against Drunk Driving because the vested interests CCF represents stand to lose money as a result of effective advocacy campaigns. A more apt appellation for the Center for Consumer Freedom would be the Center for Cunning Fabrication or perhaps Charlatans for Crafty Falsification. Actually, Cons fraudulently Covering-up Falsehoods is probably the most accurate of the three.
Sincerely,
Leana Stormont, J.D. Iowa City, IA
As the U.S. Senate prepares to vote on S.J. Res. 12, the flag protection amendment,the following is offered for your publication consideration from the perspective of a U.S. Navy veteran, Legionnaire and proponent of the measure:
Will They Still Sing "God Bless America"?
By Daniel S. Wheeler
Often I am asked by reporters, "What harm does it do to burn a flag?" This question usually comes from young men and women, most of whom aren't veterans, and I frequently sense that they really don't understand why this issue is important.
Recently, I was asked this question: "Tommy Lasorda told the story of a flag burning during a Dodger game in 1976 where Rick Monday ran out on the field and tore the flag away from a protestor. When they became aware of what had happened, the crowd stood and sang 'God Bless America.' Doesn't that prove that we don't need the flag-protection amendment?"
When I heard the question, I was reminded of what Gen. Patrick H. Brady, Medal of Honor recipient, said. He pointed out that nobody can change your mind or my mind about protecting our flag. It's the children of America that we have to think about.
What happens when they lose, or are no longer taught, respect for our flag? What will happen when an enemy threatens our nation, or even attacks our country, and our moral fiber has become so desensitized -- our patriotism has been so eroded -- that ordinary citizens aren't willing to stand and fight for the United States?
Brady reflects on those who have died in battle, and those who risked their lives for this great country. He says that the men who wear the Medal of Honor risked their lives for their country - many of them died -- but he wonders if they would be willing to risk their lives for the "country we are becoming."
Then I think about those thousands of men and women singing "God Bless America" in Dodger Stadium. Why were they doing it? Well, obviously they did it because they loved their flag.
But why do they love their flag, and why do they love their country? It's not something you are born with, this patriotism and love of our flag. It's something you learn from your parents, your teachers, your Sunday School teachers, your drill instructors, your life experiences.
Throughout the lives of those who rose to their feet, we had laws protecting Old Glory. Throughout their lives, they'd been taught that America was a good nation, in fact, the greatest nation on earth. Many probably risked their lives in her defense. They understood that "the tree of Liberty is watered with the blood of patriots."
That's why they stood and sang.
But what of this generation, and of the next? What are they being taught about love of country? What are they being taught about the greatness of America? How many of them will start each school day pledging their allegiance to our flag, as most of us did? How many of them will learn the proper way to respect her, and what she means and why patriotism is important?
And what of those who grow up learning that the flag is just one symbol among many, just one point of view, not deserving of any special recognition, dignity or respect? How will they reconcile the idea that we prove our love for our nation's flag by allowing those who hate America to desecrate it without penalty?
Twenty years from now, when another Rick Monday snatches a flag from someone who is trying to burn it, will the crowd still sing "God Bless America," or will it rise in anger because the game has been delayed?
It's certainly true -- as we've heard people say -- one person burning a flag, or urinating on it, or defecating on it, or trampling it under his feet, will not harm Old Glory. But it's not true that no harm is done.
The harm is done if the American people fail to respond to such vile and hurtful conduct. The harm is done only if, by our apathy, we condone the defiling of the banner that has draped the caskets of our American heroes. Edmund Burke once said: "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."
Failure to protect our flag by law is not a celebration of liberty; it is the celebration of evil. A great nation cannot preserve its greatness by turning a blind eye and a deaf ear to that which is wrong, to that which is destructive, to that which is immoral and evil.
What harm does it do to burn a flag?
Over time it destroys the very fabric of our nation. It undermines the goodness that makes us great; and it ensures that future generations will not stand and spontaneously sing "God Bless America" because they will not know that - once -- God did.
Daniel S. Wheeler is the President of the Citizens Flag Alliance, Inc., and the Executive Director of The American Legion National Headquarters in Indianapolis, Indiana.
Dear Editor, As all prison reformers welcome Federal receivership, of this highly troubled prison health care system, many more inmates are still dying as we wait. This obvious dismal medical negligence, still persists. The Department of Corrections, denies good Doctor's requests, and threatens them, so they can remain silent. The guards create medical conditions, through abuse and torture of inmates, which produces the out of control medical guarding-costs !! The guards deny basic medical treatment & medication for inmates who suffer from life-threatening illnesses. The guards have no business, playing Doctor or Nurse. No wonder some inmates commit suicide!! Torture does not reduce crime! It is a definite crime in itself ,which causes crime to rise, because people who have been tortured never get over it. Luckily,if they do come out of this pit of hell, funded by our tax dollars, would you want them, as your next door neighbor ?? The system does not care, about our safety!! If they cared, this abuse and torture would not exist, as it is now. They abuse prisoners, knowing, darn well, they will be thrown out into society,with worst problems !!! We the People pick up the tab, torture business as usual !!!
Alexis Endurance,San Francisco, Calif. United for No Injustice Oppression or Neglect
Op-ed: Flag Amendment Fixes Constitution By Patrick H. Brady
As we near a Senate vote on the flag amendment, which passed the House for the sixth time June 22, the hysteria in the media runs wild. They fear it could pass and, in their frenzy, they distort the facts. From recent radio and TV interviews, it is clear to me that many of them have not read the amendment and do not understand its purpose or impact. Tragically, they mislead their audience and are blatantly unfair to the truth. As an aside, many of those who fight for the right to desecrate the symbol of our country are outraged at the desecration of the symbol of many terrorists. Let's look at the truth.
Many in the media support flag desecration as free "expression." One need only think of the many types of expression to know why the Founders wisely eschewed that word. Some, in desperation to fit their objections into the First Amendment, use the word "speech" in contradiction of the dictionary and in defiance to reason.
Sixteen years ago 90 Senators voted for a statute to protect the flag after the Supreme Court, in Texas v. Johnson, took that right away. Those Senators could not have so voted if they believed flag desecration was constitutionally protected speech. Three of four Americans, all 50 states and over 70 percent of the Congress agree that desecrating the flag is not speech.
Critics say the amendment protects the flag and changes the Bill of Rights. It does neither, and this is important to understand.
The flag amendment says: "The Congress shall have power to prohibit the physical desecration of the flag of the United States." An amendment, of itself, does not protect the flag. It simply takes control over the flag away from the courts and returns it to the people where it resided until 1989. Once the amendment is ratified, and only then, can a law be passed to protect the flag. This point is fundamental for those Senators who seek a statute to protect Old Glory. They can have a statute, but only after an amendment is ratified by the people.
As for changing the Bill of Rights, consider this. By judicial fiat, with a single vote from one Supreme Court Justice, flag desecration was inserted into the Bill of Rights. If you deny this, then answer this question: If the Court had declared that flag burning was not speech, would they then have amended the Bill of Rights?
One pundit feared the amendment would curtail the rights of those who hate us. There are no laws against hating, but there are laws against hateful conduct. Flag burning fits both roles. But this is about rights, the right of the people to protect their flag, the right of the majority to rule, the right of the people to define their Constitution. And beyond the flag, this issue spills over into the right to protect our children from pornography, the right to own property, to pray, to post the Ten Commandments, and to say the Pledge of Allegiance.
If we can recapture our flag, we will have begun a march to recapture our Constitution.
Retired U.S. Army Maj. Gen. Patrick H. Brady is a recipient of the Congressional Medal of Honor, credited with the medical evacuation of over 5,000 combat casualties while serving as a "Dustoff" helicopter pilot during the Vietnam War. He is Chairman of the Board of the Citizen's Flag Alliance, a coalition of more than 140 civic, fraternal, veterans, minority and business organizations representing some 20 million Americans.
© Copyright 2011 by canyon-news.com |
