Weather | Sports | Forums | Comics | Classifieds | Calendar | Movies
Re: Connect the dots on prison torture, by Anne Applebaum, June 19.
The apathy of the American public regarding the torture of Iraqi and Afghan prisoners is disheartening but not surprising. I wish Anne Applebaum had gone a step further and tried to highlight with her eloquence and insight the origin of this apathy. Is not this the same public that witnesses with righteous satisfaction the execution of prisoners, that calls for harsher punishment of convicted felons, that reacts to the news of assault weapons massacres with stronger support of the NRA and free access to guns? To add insult to injury, this same public feigns a righteous indignation toward abortion, while fostering the very culture of violence from which abortion and any other forms of assault to human life stem.
The main legacy of the Reagan years, embraced and developed by the present administration, has been the loss of the sense of human decency. We have learned to feel good about ourselves by eliminating any sense of social guilt, a process also known as "blame the victim." We now justify revenge through capital punishment as "sense of closure." We blame the homeless for their own poverty, the sick for their own diseases, the innocent victims of shootings for not carrying a gun themselves. How different is this attitude from that of the soldiers who enjoyed torturing and humiliating potential terrorists?
Re: The seeds of terrorism sown by Saudi system, by Susan Taylor Martin, June 19.
A great article. Susan Martin tells it like it is with no political spin. It should be required reading for anyone who still thinks Saudi Arabia is an ally of the United States. After years of supporting the Wahhabi-brand of education in their schools, the Saudi royal family is being haunted and terrorized by this radical form of Islam which condemns Western secularism and materialism. This is happening while the royal family continues to blame Zionists for their problems and the discontent throughout the Middle East.
As was pointed out, the Saudi security system is a joke - and in fact may have contributed to recent violence against Western foreigners. The St. Petersburg Times ought to send a copy of this article to the State Department in Washington. Maybe then somebody there will realize what it appears everyone else in America already knows.
I share the Iraqi people's dismay that the Bush administration wish to raze Abu Ghraib prison. Despite several regrettable acts that have been performed there, it remains a perfectly viable institution. I think we should do what is usually done when a structure receives a bad reputation - simply rename it.
I can think of no better person to honor in this way than Iraq's own benefactor. I think the George W. Bush Penitentiary is a fine name.
I know many millions of Americans would derive comfort from the knowledge that somewhere out there is a prison with our president's name on it.
Re: Where's the proof?, editorial, June 22.
The evidence of links between al-Qaida and Iraq is hardly secret - you would just never know about it, given the media's penchant for underreporting the facts. And while there is no credible evidence that Saddam Hussein collaborated with terrorists to carry out the 9/11 attacks, there are many examples of cooperation between Iraq and al-Qaida that go back nearly a decade. To name but a few:
Abdul Rahman Yasin, who was involved in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, escaped to Iraq after fleeing the United States. According to documents seized by U.S. soldiers in Tikrit, the Iraqi government gave him a house and paid him a salary during the time he was there.
Abu Musaab al-Zarqawi, currently the most-wanted terrorist in Iraq (and believed to be the murderer of Nick Berg) fled there after being wounded in Afghanistan in 2002, before the U.S. invasion, and received medical treatment there. After he recovered, Hussein gave him permission to set up terrorist training camps inside Iraq.
According to Colin Powell, Osama bin Laden had a nonaggression pact with Saddam Hussein, as well as an agreement to jointly develop weapons.
The list could go on and on, but you get the idea. Had any of this evidence received the attention from the media it deserved, the public you claim to inform might have a different idea about ties between Iraq and al-Qaida. But that would undercut your campaign to impugn President Bush.
I was not aware that the 9/11 commission has also become the Iraqi war commission.
I thought the commission's job was to discover the events leading up to 9/11, not to attack the merits of the Iraqi war. So then, why is this commission going out of its way to make this point? It has been made apparent that the commission has become little more than an anti-Bush campaign.
This commission appears to be a huge waste of time. The attacks of 9/11 took place because America was operating under a different paradigm. For the most part, our country was committed to a policy of containment through economic sanctions and limited military involvement. We tried to contain the terrorist threat and it did not work. We tried to contain Saddam Hussein, and only the Iraqi people suffered. Economic sanctions did not work. They do, however, breed hate in the innocent people they target.
President Bush has developed the right policy. These types of threats take boots on the ground to be resolved. It has worked in Afghanistan and it will work in Iraq.
Congratulations on printing page 10A on June 13, In honor of America's fallen: Stories behind some of the service members who lost their lives in Iraq in recent weeks. This took a lot of courage since the president and the Department of Defense are strictly against the American public knowing the true cost in human lives and permanent injuries of this war.
I would recommend that this be expanded to include disabling wounds and listing the surviving kin.
We must know just how much this war is costing, not only in dollars but in lives, disabilities and total impact on families and communities. Until this is known by all Americans and all Americans get behind the war, this war will continue like the Korean conflict, Vietnam mess and all wars/conflicts since World War II.
Re: Why are we in Iraq?, editorial, June 18.
We've come a long way in four years from "it depends on what the meaning of is, is" to "we never actually said that was the reason for the war."
President Bush now argues he never said that Iraq had actual weapons of mass destruction, just that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction thoughts. Bush now argues he never said Iraq was a co-conspirator in 9/11, only that Saddam Hussein likes terrorists. Bush said Hussein treated his people terribly, so we had to go in and show them how the rule of law should be applied to one's enemies - even prisoners. Bush said that Hussein was a bad man and had to be removed because he didn't obey international law, and oh, by the way, the Geneva Convention doesn't apply to us.
The reasons given for the war have been shown one by one to have been false. When this is pointed out, instead of being the Man of Integrity, who says what he believes, Bush condescendingly condemns critics for not listening closely enough to the exact wording of what was said. You know, like "it depends on what the meaning of is, is."
It seems that when it comes to asking the reasons why we had to attack Iraq, Bush would prefer the role he has assigned us - which is, "not to reason why" but just to "do or die."
Our enemies abroad certainly have been wearing their thinking caps when you consider what it must have taken to execute the twin towers sortie on 9/11. We all know that a Somali linked to al-Qaida has been charged with plotting to bomb an Ohio mall, and that national monuments may be in danger.
But let's put on our own thinking caps. Just a few miles from any of our homes is a school, guaranteed to house anywhere from hundreds to thousands of our children several hours each day. Should a very small number of terrorists have plans to attack even a few of our mostly centralized school systems, the results will be devastating, and easily result in more loss of life than the 9/11 attack.
My intent in writing this is not to wave a red cloak in the face of potential terrorists. Rather it is to stimulate citizens to move for protection of perhaps this country's greatest asset, our children. I have yet to hear of, or see implemented, any significant programs banning trucks, vans and perhaps even cars from sufficiently close proximity to any school to prevent a car bomb from killing hundreds of our children. Barricades are simple, relatively inexpensive and quite effective in thwarting this type of attack. Small aircraft and suicide bombers on foot pose a lesser threat, but any of these can achieve the desired public fear and disruption.
Parents, school boards, state and local governments, I urge you to take some action. Lay out an effective defensive plan and implement it before the next school year begins.
Re: House makes a business decision about air cargo inspections, June 19.
If there is any doubt about our government's priorities, it should be put to rest with the vote of 211-191 defeating the inspections of cargo aboard passenger airlines. This government will always side with the corporate interests that own it. They can spend billions for the war in Iraq, which benefits the military-industrial complex. But $700-million is too great a cost to protect the American people. Is it any wonder that they predict another terrorist attack?
Does anyone remember Jose Padilla? He was the guy that was arrested in Chicago and accused of planning to use a radioactive dirty bomb on the United States. This was about two years ago. Since then, he has been held in a military brig without having charges brought upon him and, until recently, without access to a lawyer.
Some may counter with, "He is a threat to the United States; he should be held indefinitely." The only problem with this argument is that Padilla is a U.S. citizen. Being a U.S. citizen gives you certain unalienable rights. These rights include the right to face your accuser, the right to a speedy and fair trial, and the right to an attorney. Further, in the United States, you are determined to be innocent until proven guilty.
If Padilla is guilty, then fine, incarcerate him forever. But give him his constitutional rights and his day in court. If the Bush administration can get around the Bill of Rights by naming someone an "enemy combatant," then what are the troops abroad really fighting for?
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 fax to 727 893-8675 or through our Web site at: http://www.sptimes.com/letters/
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.