Letters

Editor,

As to the guest perspective, "America was shaken but not defeated,” by Catherine Brinkman in the Sept. 11 edition of the Daily Journal, the quagmire that we find ourselves in today goes back to the Reagan Administration when he decided to arm Islamic extremists who were fighting the Russians who had invaded Afghanistan — this was to be Russia’s Vietnam. Every administration forward had something to do with arming and perpetuating the problems that we are facing today.

But, to find fault only with former President Clinton is outrageous. After the first attack on the World Trade Center in 1993, the terrorists, Ramzi Yousef, Abdul Hakim Murad and Wali Khen Amin Shah, who were responsible for this devastation, were apprehended and are serving time in federal prison. It was under President Clinton’s watch that over twenty al-Qaida cells in twenty countries were uncovered and demobilized which foiled plans from acts such as assassinating the Pope to assaults on the Israeli embassy in Washington to more acts of terrorism than I care to list.

Even though he was constantly fighting the Republican-controlled Congress for funding, President Clinton tripled the counter terrorism budget for the FBI and doubled counter-terrorist funding overall. He had in place the perfect manual for fighting terrorism -- break up al-Qaida cells and arrest its personnel; attack the financial supporters; freeze its assets; stop its funding through fake charities; give aid to governments fighting al-Qaida; use covert action in Afghanistan to eliminate training camps; and, put Special Forces on the ground in Afghanistan to route out bin Laden. This plan was in place a few weeks prior to the inauguration of George W. Bush in 2000.

While Bush spent 42 percent of his first seven months in office at Camp David, Kennebunkport, or at his ranch in Texas, Sandy Berger, Clinton’s national security advisor, had briefed Condoleezza Rice of Clinton’s national security plan and the threat from al-Qaida. All was ignored. After 9/11, everything that was in the Clinton doctrine on terrorism was implemented.

Frank Scafani

San Bruno

Mention Vietnam, that

will take courage

Editor,

Columnist Keith Kreitman writes as though it took courage to point out the need for a draft. "So, there! I’ve said it,” he wrote in the Daily Journal. ("The D word we dare not utter,” Sept 2-3).

Kreitman brings up his experience in World War II, which is rapidly becoming our national security blanket. What will take courage is to mention Vietnam, when so many of today’s ruling class avoided service with a shout of "Hell, no, we won’t go.” And women, who have decried the "old boys’ network” for a decade or so, never even register. Keith, smell the coffee: ’01 wasn’t ’41. All we have is a thin red line. Deal with it.

James O. Clifford Sr.

Redwood City

The unknown epidemic

Editor,

Jeremy Herb’s article, "Lyme disease often misdiagnosed” in the Aug. 22 edition of the Daily Journal was simply perfect. I thank him so very much for all of the time that he put into this, for researching, contacting others, and being willing to have an open mind long enough to pursue the correct path with a sensitivity rarely seen or felt in the media.

A job very well done, and I do hope that you will be able to catalyst this into a deeper understanding of tick-borne diseases and how this "unknown” epidemic profoundly affects lives both near and far.

Melanie Reber

Redwood City

The letter writer is executive director of The National Lyme Disease Memorial Park Project.

Editor’s note: This letter is being reprinted because of a production error.

Rebuttal to pro-unionism

Editor,

I was going to write a rebuttal to Shelly Kessler’s pro-union editorial, "Are We Working to Live or Living to Work?” but then decided an excerpt of Thomas Woods’ essay "Labor Union Myths” from LewRockwell.com could do it better than I ever could. Here it is:

"Labor historians and activists would doubtless be at a loss to explain why, at a time when unionism was numerically negligible (a whopping three percent of the American labor force was unionized by 1900) and federal regulation all but nonexistent, real wages in manufacturing climbed an incredible 50 percent in the United States from 1860-1890, and another 37 percent from 1890-1914, or why American workers were so much better off than their much more heavily unionized counterparts in Europe. Most of them seem to cope with these inconvenient facts by neglecting to mention them at all.

"Labor economist W.H. Hutt referred to the Norris-La Guardia and Wagner Acts in 1973 as ‘economic blunders of the first magnitude.’ Economists Vedder and Gallaway find that New Deal labor legislation played a significant role in aggravating the unemployment problem. Both theory and history reveal the same conclusion: a society that genuinely wishes to become wealthier, to enjoy more leisure time, and to live longer will simply repeal all taxation on business and capital. That would do more for the material well-being of American workers than did all historians’ favorite word — put together.”

Gene Mahoney

Burlingame

<