Letters to the Editor 911 Victim Ellen Mariani’s Open Letter To The President Of The United States This "open letter" is coming from my heart. I want you to know that I am neither a Republican nor a Democrat and that this is not an attempt to "bash the government." You, Mr. Bush, should be held responsible and liable for any and all acts that were committed to aid in any "cover up" of the tragic events of September 11, 2001. As president you have a duty to protect the American people. On September 11th you did not instruct your staff to issue a nationwide emergency warning/alert to advise us of the attack on America. We had to receive the news of the attacks via the news networks. In the months leading up to the attacks you were repeatedly advised of a possible attack on American soil. During your daily intelligence briefings you were given information that had been uncovered that the very real possibility existed that certain undesirable elements would use commercial aircraft to destroy certain "target" buildings. You never warned the American people of this possible threat. Who were you protecting? When you took no responsibility towards protecting the general public from the possibility of attack, you were certainly not upholding the oath you spoke when you took office. In that oath you pledged to uphold the Constitution of the United States of America. On the morning of the attack, you and members of your staff were fully aware of the unfolding events yet you chose to continue on to the Emma E. Booker Elementary School to proceed with a scheduled event and "photo op." While our nation was under attack you did not appear to blink an eye or shed a tear. You continued on as if everything was "business as usual." In the days following the attacks all air traffic was grounded and Americans, including myself, were stranded wherever they had been when the flight ban was imposed. I was stranded at Midway Airport in Chicago, unable to continue on to California for my daughter's wedding. Imagine my surprise when I later found out that during this "no fly" period a number of people were flown out of the country on a 747 with Arabic lettering on the fuselage. None of these people were interviewed or questioned by any local, state, or federal agencies. Why were they allowed to leave and who exactly was on that flight? We know for a fact that some of the people on the flight were members of (or related to) the royal family of Saudi Arabia and members of the Bin Laden family. Were these people allowed to leave because of the long-standing relationships that your family has with both families? It is my belief that you intentionally allowed 9/11 to happen to gather public support for a "war on terrorism." These wars, in Afghanistan and Iraq, have not accomplished what you stated were your goals. Why have you not captured Osama Bin Laden? Where are Saddam's weapons of mass destruction? All that has happened is a bill that is passed before Congress for 87 billion dollars to rebuild what you ordered blown to bits. As an American who lost a loved one in the "war on terror" I do pray and support our troops who were sent to Afghanistan and Iraq by you. These troops have and will continue to die for your lies. As an American I can make this statement as it appears that associates of your family may stand to prosper from the rebuilding of Afghanistan and Iraq. Mr. Bush, the time has come for you to stop your control over us. Stop blocking the release of certain evidence and documents that were discovered by the 9/11 Investigation Commission if you have nothing to hide proving you did not fail to act and prevent the attacks of 9/11. Your reason for not releasing this material is that it is a matter of "national security," when in fact, I believe, it is your personal credibility/security that you are concerned with. You do not want the public to know the full extent of your responsibility and involvement. After 9/11 the PATRIOT Act and Homeland Security Act were passed. Both of these allow the government to tap your telephone, search your home, and seize whatever they feel they need to do on a whim. They can do this without a judge's review or a warrant. I feel that this is in direct conflict with our rights as stated in the Constitution and Bill of Rights. We the families of 9/11 victims need to have answers to the following questions:
It has been over two years sicne hundreds of our lost loved ones "remains" have still yet to be identified, and their remains placed in a landfill at Fresh Kill. We want our heroes brought back and given a public and proud resting place where we all can pay our respects and honor them. These innocent people never had a chance as they were taken from us on that sad September Day. In the court of public opinion Mr. Bush, your lies are being uncovered each day. My husband, all of the other victims and their families and our nation as a whole, has been victimized by your failed leadership prior to and after 9/11! I will prove this in a court of law! November 30 During a radio interview I heard recently, I learned something that I’d like to pass on to young people. Author Thom Hartmann was being interviewed about problems with corporations as monopolies, and this led to a discussion of what fascism is, what it means. It’s a word and a political system, which I very much want young people to fully comprehend, and to recognize it when they are experiencing it. The Hartmann interview was important because he pointed out his discovery of a compelling fact. He said that the dictionary definition of fascism had been changed between the 1960s and the 1990s. I don’t know how he discovered this, but I have checked. He is quite correct. Here is a definition from a 1965 G.C Merriam dictionary: Fascism [Ital. Fascismo, from fascio, to bundle together] 2: a political philosophy, movement, or regime that exalts nation and race and stands for a centralized, autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition. If you look up fascism in a more recent dictionary, here’s how that definition changes, for instance in the 1992 World Book dictionary: fascism 1. Any system of government in which property is privately owned but all industry and labor are regulated by a strong national government, while all opposition is rigorously suppressed. I think any reasonable person would say the second, later version of what fascism means is watered down, milder, and might even fit modern America after September 11, 2001. What is the USA PATRIOT Act if not a rigorous suppression of opposition? The Fairbanks city council and local Bill of Rights Defense Committee should be thanked regularly for comprehending this and passing the first resolution against it in Alaska. Some questions immediately arise. Why would the dictionary definition of a savage and discredited form of government change like this, and who would do it? It is not an accident. Why the clear emphasis on private property in the later definition, and not in the first? The fundamental means of controlling people is to control their language, and try to give new meanings to old concepts. This is what propaganda is all about. The American Civil Liberties Union is dedicated to protection, with unswerving devotion, of our basic rights as expressed in the Bill of Rights. Get to know the ACLU (and the Alaska Civil Liberties Union) and what it stands for. The civil liberties you enjoy are your inalienable rights, your legacy as an American. Protect and honor them. The price of liberty, as Thomas Jefferson proclaimed, is eternal vigilance. Your greatest freedom is dissent. It is also your highest duty, as a patriot, when you see your government heading in a bad direction, to point it out and protest. That’s the way to build a civilization. And it is also what those people are doing at the corner of Geist and University Avenues every Saturday. You might want to give them the same thanks and high regard. They deserve it too. Ever watchful, (a shorter version of this letter was sent to and published in the Fairbanks Daily News-Miner) 9 December 2003 I noted a remarkable feature about the recent not-a-campaign-ad for Senator Lisa Murkowski that—judging by brief conversations with friends and neighbors in the Golden Eagle and elsewhere—not many other people noticed. (I am assuming that most of your readers did see the advertisement, since it was saturation-broadcast, to the tune of a reported $100,000 of TV time purchased, for a brief time; we all know it was not a campaign ad, because those legally only appear shortly before an election; moreover, this one didn’t ask Alaskans for their vote, only for their letters of thanks to the good senator.) The remarkable feature: a surprisingly honest and open conclusion. Overall, the advertisement, which was paid for by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, was the usual mix of the benign and the dubious, with images of the smiling senator juxtaposed alongside photos of equally cheerful Alaskans, and perhaps Montanans—that trout stream looked awfully fishy, so to speak—while a mellifluous voice-over praised her "fresh and experienced face" (?!!?) and determination to defend Alaska jobs. Except for its uncommonly classy production values, it was pretty much a standard campaign—pardon, not-a-campaign—advertisement. But the very last voiced-over statement was a stunner: Alaskans should be willing to return Ms. Murkowski to Washington so she can continue to fight "those who want to impose their agenda on our land." The emphasis was in the voice. Now, that’s little short of astounding. Like every other thinking Alaskan, I pretty much knew that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and the industries for which it stands, truly believes it owns Alaska. That’s been true since territorial days. I just never thought I’d hear the Chamber come right out and say it. But it did, over and over for dozens of replays. Perhaps we should all write letters of thanks to the Chamber for setting such a high standard of openness at this phase of the not-a-campaign. Sincerely,
| ||
 | | |
