Ashcroft Accuses Critics of Aiding Terrorists

Re “Ashcroft Defends U.S. Anti-Terrorism Tactics, Saying That ‘We Are at War,’ ” Dec. 7: Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft’s appearance before the Senate Judiciary Committee confirms his standing as a reactionary throwback to the likes of J. Edgar Hoover and Joseph McCarthy. His equation of questioning the tactics of the executive branch with supporting terrorism is patently offensive.

I would like to remind Ashcroft that this nation was founded on the principle that questioning government is an act of patriotism and that defense of the Constitution is not only the right but the responsibility of every citizen. His insistence that his and President Bush’s actions are in no way verging on dangerous constitutional territory is patently false. When one branch of government takes deliberate steps to prevent the oversight and approval of its actions by the other two branches of government, as the president’s executive order on military tribunals specifically does, that branch is well outside the spirit, if not the letter, of the Constitution.

I resent Ashcroft’s divisive and disingenuous attempt to silence the voices of democracy.

Jason Lyon

Los Angeles

*

Ashcroft to Congress: Criticize or question me or my policies and you are automatically aiding and supporting terrorists. His appearance just confirmed what thinking people have known from the beginning: The man has the makings of a junior-grade Joe McCarthy and the self-righteous hubris to propel himself swiftly past his lily-livered “opposition” right down the path of unregenerate demagoguery. The citizens of Oregon were only the first in line.

Bruce Burroughs

Sherman Oaks

*

So, Ashcroft continues his quest to weaken the gun-control laws passed by Congress (Ashcroft voted for an amendment to destroy background-check records while a Missouri senator). He has now refused to let the FBI check the records of the Justice Department to determine whether any of the 1,200 detainees suspected of involvement with the Sept. 11 attacks had bought guns.

In addition to the FBI, the International Assn. of Chiefs of Police has questioned this Ashcroft decision. Ashcroft has trod heavily on personal rights in every other aspect of his investigation but has decided that the gun issue has no place in seeking justice for the grievous attacks.

Tom Hamman

Huntington Beach

*

Re “Wartime Powers Without a War,” Commentary, Dec. 6: Jim Mann quibbles over the semantics of war and of the U.S. right to try war criminals without a formal declaration of war. The root of the matter is that our nation’s very existence is at stake and our leaders have a slim-to-none chance of stopping a terrorist armed with small nuclear devices from destroying multiple cities, killing millions and bankrupting America.

Perhaps Mann could better spend his time helping America survive rather than protecting those who want to destroy us.

Rick David

Valencia

*

I find it reassuring to know that all the public debate about the pros and cons of the Bush administration’s initiation of military tribunals, indefinite detentions of suspects at undisclosed locations and warrantless wiretaps of conversations between prisoners and lawyers demonstrates a healthy affirmation of our obsessive defense of the Bill of Rights.

I hope that our friends and enemies are paying close attention. To paraphrase Winston Churchill, this could be America’s finest hour.

Paul Fuller

Palm Desert

*

I am concerned about the future of this country. It is time to convene a constitutional convention. We need a national debate about what should be done to protect our freedoms before they are all lost.

Jay Crosby

Oxnard