DOJ WEBSITE CHANGE -- THE REAL ISSUES
DOJ WEBSITE CHANGE
Earlier I posted concerns expressed by many about the changes in the DOJ website. I do not post many items from the web, rather I try to do my own analysis of issues and write my own thoughts. Occasionally, I do post other pieces when I find them credible. Accordingly, I posted a piece regarding the new DOJ website changes. A bit of furor has arisen over the changes. I have studied the issue, and hereby stand by my posting and thank the friend for sending it. From my analysis, I conclude that, while the focus of most has been on the quotation from a questionable philosopher, the real operative issues are why remove the "colors" and why change the site at all. PolitiFacts focused on the wrong issues, as did many of those on the web. Hence, what is legitimately a question of continued destruction of American symbolism is buried in subterfuge of a lesser issue, perhaps not an issue at all. While this may not seem to be a big issue with all of the major ones we have to deal with, it is emblematic of the trend that threatens "traditional America." With these thoughts, I take liberty to post below a letter written to the website manager at DOJ.
Department of Justice
United States of America
This letter is to express profound concern for the changes made to the DOJ website. I have read your explanation and reasoning for changing the website. Frankly, a stretch of credulity is required for thinking people to accept your reasoning. I have also read PolitiFact's explanation of the quotes included therein. While there is valid reason for concern over the chosen quotes, and PolitiFact's rationalization thereof, the operative questions are different.
If the website is to emphasize the jurisprudence system of the United States of America, why not emphasize the essence of British Common Law, which our forefathers wisely chose, over all others such as Napoleonic Law, as the basis of our Constitutional Republic? Why focus, in an operative document, on quotations from philosophers, whose intentions legitimately can be debated, and have been – the basis of objections of some?
Why eliminate the national “colors,” the American flag that symbolizes traditional America, and replace it with stark black symbolizing nothing? I would ask that you simply take this question for its intent and to avoid any impulse to interpret it as having any other purpose. This is legitimately viewed as but one more example of the trend of too many today, including some in current government positions, to eliminate symbolism of “traditional America.” Other examples are: failure to salute the flag and the national anthem, removal of “In God We Trust,” forbidding reciting of the pledge of allegiance, prohibiting display of the American flag in certain situations, and more.
Why revise the website at all? The explanation of doing so to make the site more easily useable requires suspension of analytical thinking and reality given the questionable changes noted herein.
I ask you to consider these questions as legitimate concerns, and to avoid the impulse to shuck them off as “radical” thoughts, all too often the claim when today's government officials are questioned in any way. I'd also suggest that you consider the reality that DOJ is to be questioned justifiably today for many legitimate reasons from avoiding prosecuting voter intimidation to not dealing appropriately with what must be characterized as scandals. The change in the website may not rise to the level of seriousness as these issues, but it is quite serious in the context of the trend to destroy the symbols of “traditional America.” Thank you for your attention.
Dr. J. A. Mann, PhD