Legal Schnauzer readers will not want to miss a compelling interview at BUZZFLASH with investigative journalist Larisa Alexandrovna.
Alexandrovna has been one of the primary chroniclers of the Bush Justice Department scandal, and she and BUZZFLASH interviewer Mark Karlin nicely tie together the motivations that led to political prosecutions and the injustices that resulted.
The Don Siegelman case in Alabama is front and center, but Alexandrovna also points out both the illegality and the hard-hearted evil that permeates the Paul Minor prosecution in Mississippi.
Many Americans seem too busy chattering on their cell phones and weaving through traffic in their SUVs to notice what probably will become the worst scandal in U.S. history. But Alexandrovna, who was born in the former Soviet Union, is quick to notice government corruption:
BuzzFlash: You've got the skills of an investigative journalist. Why does this particular case make you so impassioned?
Larisa Alexandrovna: Probably because it reminds me of the Soviet Union and a country that my family and I escaped from. It's no longer a country now, but technically I'm from the Ukraine, but at the time, the Ukraine was part of the Soviet Union. And it was single-party rule. And you have allegiance to the party. And the party controlled everything. And this is what I see happening here.
This disturbs me on a very personal level. And the fact that the public does not see this, or at least is starting to see this, is really frightening me. Because at some point, this will become irreversible. It will become so institutionalized that no amount of protesting or putting pressure on your member of Congress will change the structure that has been set up. And so, you know, that's basically why this makes me so, you know, crazy, so impassioned, is because it frightens me.
Perhaps, someday, more folks who were born on American soil will take notice long enough to be frightened, too.
Do you want to get totally flipped out. Take a look at this! http://www.tothepointnews.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3114&Itemid=76
Why do you only approve for viewing favorable comments? Partisan to a fault, I presume.
Anyone who sends an informed opinion or genuine question will see it published here.
And if someone has the courage to print their actual name and tell me who they are (with an e-mail address), I will print most anything, no matter how unfavorable--as long as it doesn't appear to defame someone.
But I'm not interested in publishing anonymous, attack-dog comments from people who don't know what they are talking about and clearly aren't interested in doing the work it takes to understand relevant issues. That's the policy of most bloggers I'm aware of.
Post a Comment