Weather | Sports | Forums | Comics | Classifieds | Calendar | Movies
© St. Petersburg Times, published December 17, 2001
Why is the United States always compelled to take the most straightforward situation and turn it into a major media event of biblical proportions. I refer to the recent capture of John Walker, the U.S. citizen caught fighting for the Taliban. We now face the inevitable situation wherein the United States will expose its national psyche to the world while we agonize over what to do with the wretch.
The around-the-clock media coverage has already started, and there is already talk of a trial -- a trial, with the usual media frenzy, posturing by celebrity lawyers, interminable appeals, etc. And even if Walker is eventually found guilty and sentenced to death, we know the sentence will never actually be carried out, at least not in our lifetime, given the glacial pace of our legal system.
Let's put this in perspective. By his own statements, it's clear that Walker knew what he was doing, and did so of his own volition. He is a traitor; he is guilty of treason. Here's what we should do: Extract as much intelligence from him as possible, then take him out back and let the firing squad have its way with him. This accomplishes four things:
It spares us years of ceaseless media coverage of the circus of trials and appeals.
It saves the taxpayers the millions of dollars it will take to prosecute, defend and incarcerate the fool.
It will dispense the justice he deserves, swiftly and efficiently.
It will send a message to other starry-eyed spoiled brats that it's not a good idea to betray one's country.
-- Philip R. Thompson, Tierra Verde
Re: Devotion brought soldier, disciple to fateful meeting, Dec. 11.
One was a hero and one a traitor, yes traitor. There is no other way to describe John Walker Lindh. Walker (as he is usually called) made a decision to leave America of his own free will. Therefore, he gave up any rights to be considered an American. Comments about him being a 20-year-old kid and just rebelling make my blood boil. Living in a free society does not give you the right to take up arms against your country.
Be assured, Walker would have killed CIA officer Johnny Micheal Spann or any other American if he had the opportunity. Spann would be alive today if it were not for the cowardly individuals who murdered thousands and whom Walker is supporting. I cannot understand why anyone would not consider him a traitor to his country. I believe it is a very serious error by the media not to call him a traitor. If the media want to call him an American, it should be an American traitor.
Walker should not be given the opportunity to return to American soil for trial. He should be tried in Afghanistan, the country he choose of his own free will, and receive the only punishment he deserves, death.
-- G.L. Hammond, Trinity
Re: John Walker.
It is my impression that by virtue of enlisting in a foreign army, a U.S. citizen forfeits his citizenship, at the discretion of the government. Surely, this applies to John Walker, who joined the army of the Taliban, which at that time was the sovereign power in Afghanistan. This would allow Walker to be tried by a military tribunal. No Johhnie Cochran, no Court TV, no prolonged circus. Just a speedy hearing and speedier execution. Let this traitor receive his just deserts without delay.
-- Lee Skipwith, St. Petersburg
Re: Decisions made by those who never served, by Mark Shields, Dec. 9.
Shields' column is only partly well taken. I do not know, for example, whether Sen. Joseph Lieberman, a vocal proponent of proceeding against Saddam Hussein, served in the military. Whether he did or not, Shields' attempt to make nonservice a partisan issue by identifying only Republicans who did not serve is transparent. I am certain that the children of the pundit and chattering classes are as under-represented in the military as are the children of political and social privilege.
During the draft, it was inevitably the children of social, economic and political privilege who were able to avoid service or who had the wherewithal to dodge. I suspect that Shields would find that the avoiders and the dodgers had more in common with the chattering and pundit classes than with the Republicans whom Shields finds so distasteful.
-- Jeffrey P. Meyer, Clearwater
Re: Decisions made by those who never served.
Mark Shields takes to task Richard Perle, Trent Lott and Newt Gingrich for advocating an attack on Iraq before we are even clear about how events will play out in Afghanistan. He has a case to make but his list of names of politicians and those viewed as privileged is short, shallow and historically myopic.
Such advocates in privileged positions have existed in every American war and most recently and offensively in Vietnam, where many privileged and educated whites successfully avoided military duty. Shields is right, in my opinion, that the chattering classes of hawks are premature in talking about Iraq, as bad as that nation's leadership is, before more of the dust settles in Afghanistan, before public opinion is supportive of such a military effort and Congress can get behind President Bush on the idea.
But Shields touches on another area indirectly which I think is very important to Afghanistan and whatever follows it in applying a policy of destroying terrorism. Most Americans, as in the Persian Gulf War, remain pleasantly insulated from the reality of the action and are at best participants in a TV spectacle. Sept. 11 may have changed us but most of us didn't really participate in it any more than in Afghanistan. Americans must sense some depth of a shared experience in these events so that as a nation we all will sacrifice and care and not leave that to a few people as is now the case.
-- James R. Gillespie, St. Petersburg
The Dec. 9 letter, A new draft will solve nothing, commenting on your Dec. 2 article on a military draft (Why we need a draft, by Charles Moskos and Paul Glastres) seems to have attained a new high in narrow minded, ill-informed arrogance. The letter writer's statement, "Military service brings forfeiture of one's dignity, rights and choice" is so far from describing my own career as an Air Force officer that it hardly merits a serious rebuttal.
Choice of career field (pilot), choice of locations, choice of aircraft, choice of further training and professional education were all mine to make.
There was also the choice, consciously made, that in times of crisis one served when and where the needs were greatest. But "sacrifices" like this are not exclusive to the military (and military professionals do not regard them as sacrifices). The letter writer should be everlastingly grateful for those among us who are willing to forfeit our dignity and rights so he can continue to enjoy his.
-- Anthony Skey, Lt. Col., USAF (retired), St. Petersburg
I certainly hope that the war with Afghanistan will not be expanded to Iraq if Osama bin Laden is not found in Afghanistan. Without any doubt, the next budget will not be balanced due to the cost of the Afghanistan war. The cost in human lives is much more than enough.
If we spent more on good food for the displaced Afghans, there might be less hate among them.
-- Arthur H. Rounds, Tampa
They are still looking for Osama bin Laden and can't find him?
It wouldn't surprise me if he shaved and got a hair cut and is in New York City staying at the Waldorf Astoria.
-- Paul Stuble, St. Petersburg
Re: Don Addis' cartoon, Drumhead Justice, Dec. 11.
This is not the first time Don Addis shows total disrespect for our government officials, elected or appointed.
This cartoon is a disgrace and an insult to John Ashcroft, who is doing a superb job for our government.
-- Fran Briggs, Largo
At the risk of being labeled suspicious, I feel compelled to remind all citizens and especially journalists that governments have a history of treachery. It is not only the subject who can betray, but the sovereign as well. Subterfuge, duplicity, guile and terrorism are characteristics of states as well people.
-- Daniel P. Quinn, St. Petersburg
Re: Interceptor scores in missile defense test, Dec. 4.
As a growing number of nations, and perhaps terrorist groups themselves, develop nuclear weapons, it's understandable that Washington wants to create a missile defense system. However, I wish that President Bush and Congress were as proactive in regard to other critical and extreme vulnerabilities on the homeland security front.
We should, for instance, be doing much more to protect our seaports and coast-hugging nuclear plants from nuclear attacks. This would include a full search of shipping cargo while it's still off the U.S. coast. Perhaps even more important is the need to "harden" our civilian electronic infrastructure (power plants, telephone lines, computer hubs, etc.) against a high-altitude nuclear blast. As our leaders well know, such a blast would create an electromagnetic pulse that could, in a single stroke, disable the entire U.S. civilian power and communications infrastructure.
We should be taking actions today (indeed, we should have been taking them for the past 30 years) to prepare for this national catastrophe, however many billions it costs us. The price of prevention is not nearly as high as the price of neglect.
-- Mark Vickers, St. Petersburg
Re: Diversity has hurt media's credibility.
John Leo's Dec. 12 column should be required reading by your editorial board. The Times is among the worst papers in the country when it comes to politically correct bias. You have minimum credibility when reporting on controversial matters. If the Tampa paper covered this county well, you would have far fewer readers.
I guess I keep hoping that reality will one day center your institution and you will be in touch with mainstream America.
-- Bob Luckman, Clearwater
The Dec. 12 column by John Leo Diversity has hurt media's credibility should be required reading in the St. Petersburg Times newsroom! Time to wake up down there!
-- Roger Eaton, Palm Harbor
We invite readers to write to us. Letters for publication should be addressed to Letters to the Editor, P.O. Box 1121, St. Petersburg, FL 33731. They can be sent by e-mail to letters@sptimes.com or by fax to (727) 893-8675.
They should be brief and must include the writer's name, address and phone number. Please include a handwritten signature when possible.
Letters may be edited for clarity, taste and length. We regret that not all letters can be published.