Top 10 Letters

*1*
Call me fooled. Judging from his previous writings, I thought Matt Labash had better sense than to be taken in by the animal rightists and their hyper-pious sheep’s clothing (For the Love of PETA).

Labash couldn’t be more mistaken in asserting that “the animal-rights movement has been taken over by eco-weenies.” The last 15 years of animal-rights “progress” in the United States has been a story about the most violent eco-extremists imaginable assuming positions of power.

In this country alone, the violent Animal Liberation Front (ALF) and its cousin the Earth Liberation Front (ELF) have caused over $60 million of damage during nearly a thousand criminal acts. People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals has played (and continues to play) a frightening and honorless role in the carnage.

A PETA “fact sheet” gathering dust in my filing cabinet declares ALF to be an “army of the kind.” That’s quite an honorific for a group that the FBI classifies as “a major domestic terrorist threat.” PETA has a history of fronting for these thugs, magically producing videotapes of violent crimes only hours after they were committed. PETA president Ingrid Newkirk herself was personally implicated in a 1995 arson, accused, in sworn testimony, by a former employee, of conspiring with an arsonist who later served hard time for his crime.

PETA also puts its money where its mouth is: At last count, the group has spent over $100,000 in tax-exempt money trying to help activists beat arson and attempted murder raps.

And barely a year ago, PETA actually made a sizable cash donation to the ELF. It’s right there on their tax return! PETA names the grantee as the “North American Earth Liberation Front” and describes the grant’s purpose in the following words: “To support their program activities.” By ELF’s own published accounting, these “program activities” cost business owners and taxpayers over $13 million in 2001 alone.

Last summer Bruce Friedrich, a PETA campaign director who is the group’s third-in-command, told a rapt crowd of animal-rights conventioneers that “blowing stuff up and smashing windows” is “a great way to bring animal liberation.” Friedrich continued: “I think it would be great if all of the fast-food outlets, slaughterhouses, these laboratories, and banks that fund them exploded tomorrow.” To a standing ovation, he added: “Hallelujah to the people who are willing to do it.”

–David Martosko, Director of Research, Center for Consumer Freedom

*2*
I lived in Iraq for over a year, not as soldier but with my family before the Iran-Iraq War (Terry Eastland, How Danger Becomes “Clear and Present”). Saddam was the country’s leader when I lived there as well. My family and I left Iraq six days before Iran bombed Basrah. The United States befriended Iraq at that time, and my family, as well as families from other countries, were there to help manage oil.

The people there were spiritual, but more down to earth than you would suspect. I had the opportunity to see the everyday life of the people in Baghdad, the marsh people, the people of Basrah. The culture was different, but the people were genuine. I remember the time when I lead a man who was thirsty to our home. My mother, whom I’m sure, due to the circumstances was afraid, gave him something to drink. He was respectful and thankful regardless of the fact that my mother was not wearing the clothes or cover that his country and religion demanded.

I believe that the people in Iraq are as good hearted and hard working as the people here. I believe that they also choose a life without conflict or terror.

I support the President’s decision to defuse any possible threat to the American people, as well as restore the ideal of human rights in Iraq.

–Jonathan Martin

*3*
I just finished reading David Tell’s piece on the New York Times biased coverage of their poll results (All the News That’s Fit to Spin). I then visited the CBS site to view the bias for myself. One thing that Tell did not touch on, but that I think is the most absurd twisting of the results, is the party breakdown of the respondents. Unweighted, there were 201 Republicans, 240 Democrats, and 227 Independents. One would think that CBS-New York Times would correct for this slant against Republicans, but instead, they weighted it even further the other way. After applying weights, the number of Republican respondents shrunk to 180, the Democrats increased to 252, and the Independents increased to 236. Perhaps New York City was used as the basis for their weighting system.

–Lowell Bike

*4*
As a Yankee fan, I was hoping that the Cardinals would meet the Yanks in the Series (Lee Bockhorn, America’s Team). Maybe Bockhorn knows this, but the Cardinals are the only team (other than Arizona, a newcomer) to lead the Yankees head-to-head in World Series matchups, 3-2. The Cards beat the Yanks in 1926, 1942, and 1964; the Yanks beat the Cards in 1928 and 1943. I was hoping we’d go even-up this year. But since the Yanks have fallen, I’m still rooting for the Cards (and Tino Martinez).

By the way, Bockhorn says the Yanks are the “pre-eminent” team in the American League. We’d claim more: The Yankees are not only the pre-eminent team in all baseball, but in all sports. Who else has 26 championships? (I do agree that the Cards are tops in the National League.)

So why do you think Yankee fans are insufferable?

–Mike Lion

*5*
The letter writer is incorrect about Franklin (Top 10 Letters, October 7, 2002). He did indeed lend his world reputation to the proceedings on the Constitutional Convention, and fought hard for an end to slavery–the last great hope for avoiding the Civil War. The final ratification may have come after his death, but the convention closed in 1787, and on September 17, Franklin gave a stirring address for ratification. It’s all over the web.

–David Burkhart

*6*
Thanks for your article. I root for my adopted Phillies, but frankly they can never hold a candle to the Cards.

The power of a Totem–in the sociological sense–is so strong I find that I even root for the football Cardinals. (Although I confess that when they moved to Phoenix and I used to comfort people by saying, “We’ll it wasn’t like we had a football team before.”)

The feeling toward the baseball Cardinals was always different.

–Raymond R. Roberts

*7*
I found Terry Eastland’s article, “How Danger Becomes “Clear and Present” interesting because it brings out the origins of this rather optimistic position regarding public speech in America and what is to be tolerated and what is to be silenced. Said differently Holmes appears to have established a meaningless standard in the terms “clear and present danger”–and therefore has had some influence in the way men understand themselves and the function of democratic government with regard to free speech (which should be understood as distinct from “free expression”).

Personally speaking, I find Holmes’s terms to be almost perfectly vague. What principle does one presuppose to a “clear and present danger”–it seems to maintain only the public or current order and does so at the cost of undermining the meaning of the right to free speech. I guess it goes to show that free expression cannot be limited, here and now. I would say this because to answer the question, what constitutes a clear and present danger, is the struggle to find a principle (where intolerance of some speech is necessary)–where there is no such principle. I say this because Holmes appears to have broken with the founders in his terms and therefore one is inclined to call his terms, “progressive,” for whatever that’s worth. Perhaps Bush’s restatement of the terms with regard to a foreign enemy will have an influence domestically with regard to the question of the right to free speech and what it means . . . but I doubt it.

–Carl Eaton

*8*
David Skinner will just have to forgive the Nobel committee (The Nobel Thing To Do). After all, it was Alfred Nobel’s “discovery” and sales of dynamite (later used in many of the world’s munitions of war) which led to the Nobel fortune, and thus to the Nobel Prize(s).

It is the guilt of the founder (over providing a new means for human beings to destroy each other) that causes the left-leaning nature of the Nobel committee. It is understandable, even pitiable.

Carter is doing the right thing, if he does as he says he will. He will contribute the bulk of the money to the Carter Center, and, I assume, the bulk of that money will go to feed and house the poor. The Nobel people don’t need it; let the poor have it.

Besides, if Carter accepts it, the Nobel folks can’t give it to Al Gore as a campaign contribution. Lord knows, everybody else contributes to Gore, including Buddhist monks who took a vow of poverty. . . .

–Jud Caldwell

*9*
In response to Lee Bockhorn’s excellent article, “America’s Team,” there can be no doubt that St. Louis is one of America’s best baseball towns. That they have had to endure so many tragedies and injuries makes this legendary ball club’s presence all the more remarkable.

However, what about the bizarre “curse” the California/Anaheim Angels have had to endure? Dating back to 1972 (my dates might be wrong) this organization has had to deal with one tragedy after another. The more recent ones include the death of Donnie Moore and a bus accident with Buck Rodgers that nearly wiped out half the team. Though the Angels are not a classic baseball team, they most certainly deserve some support.

As do the Twins, who are being considered for contraction. Or how about the Giants? Doesn’t Dusty Baker have a great chance to become, I believe, the first black manager to lead an MLB team to a Series victory? And how long have Giants fans been waiting? 48 years? You see, either way, baseball wins. Every club has their own special claims on our support. As for me, I am just going to enjoy every moment.

–Sandro Nicolo

*10*
Nice try (Jonathan V. Last, The Case for the Empire). However, Last’s argument has a fatal flaw: He’s deliberately limited his evidence to only what’s contained in Lucas’s movies–and then he conclusively demonstrate that Lucas is a hopelessly confused moron.

Case dismissed for lack of credible evidence.

–Al Snyder