Print

Email story

Comment

Email editor

We should avoid answering violence with more violence

Thursday's violent assault on the citizens of London, which caused damage in parts of the city and most regrettably, led to the deaths of innocent civilians, must be strongly condemned. Terrorism is always wrong; it is inexcusable in any form.

As we unite to resist terrorism, we must also address forms of injustice that afflict so many in the world and are misused by some to justify and foment terror. Cooperation among religious communities, based upon shared values, must be strengthened if we are to face squarely the common challenges of overcoming terrorism. Human life is sacred; people cannot be relegated to becoming pawns, even in the struggle for human rights and global justice.

Let us express our deepest condolences to those who lost loved ones in the attacks. Let us also remember that violence should not be countered with further violence. No one ethnic or religious community should be blamed or targeted because of these attacks, as they are clearly the work of extremists.

Now is the time for nations and religious communities to unite in their efforts to confront violence and build peace.

Imperialism makes us a target

The recent bombing in London was a horrific and devastating event but totally preventable. Why won't people ask, "Why did it happen?" President Bush and his administration want us to believe that people will blow themselves up and plant bombs on buses and subways because they hate our freedom. Wrong, Mr. Bush. People will sacrifice their own lives because they despise what we're doing overseas.

Our imperialism and disastrous foreign policy of war is the reason why others want to blow us up. But instead of looking deeply into these events, Bush will use this to get what he's wanted all along: expanding the Patriot Act, increasing domestic surveillance, preventing dissent and promoting fear so that we citizens will allow Bush to keep doing what he is doing.

It's time for the press to ask, "Who gains?" and follow the trail to where it may lead.

This conflict is essential

Re: The terror attack on London.

The wonderful people of Great Britain are in our thoughts and prayers after the terrible attacks on Thursday. It should be a reminder to many Americans of just what type of animals we face in this global war on terror. There are many who insist that America is the problem. There are many who insist attacks of this type only happen to those who side with America.

But resistance to terrorism is not a root cause of terrorism. Because resistance to the schoolyard bully may invite an attack upon one's friends, it doesn't make the bully any less of a bully. It does make it right for you to protect your friends at the expense of the bully. Terrorism exists in an environment free from any rationality or human decency. To find the perpetrators of such crimes and stamp them out is, without question, the right of freedom-loving societies everywhere.

Attacks on the African embassies, the USS Cole, and the first attempt on the trade center were all perpetrated prior to 9/11 or our involvement in Iraq. Whether Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction on hand at the time of our attack is really irrelevant. He had them in the past and was only waiting for the sanctions to loosen to get them again. Should anyone have trusted him ever again? How was it wrong to bring this man down? Who cares whether he attacked the United States or not?

We are at war against all terrorists and those who enable them. This conflict is essential. It is one we must win. Hopefully, Europe will now take a more active role in this war. It is in everyone's best interest that we win this battle. Thank God we have Tony Blair and the Brits as our friends. They deserve our thanks and prayers.

We must unify against war

Re: Winning the war on terrorism must be a national priority, letter, July 8.

This letter declares war and evokes, along with the following two letters, the clear "us-them" duality so dear and necessary to warmakers of all kinds. This puts oil on the fire and moves many in the "us" camp to easily raise their fists in rage and forget at which point warmakers create suffering, whether it be now in New York, Abu Ghraib, London or Fallujah or then in Stalingrad, Berlin or Vietnam.

In times of suffering and horror, more than hatred we need unity, not that of one nation, religion or people against another (that has failed for millenniums) but unity of people against the pain and the waste of war. It is time for the question to evolve from "What can I do to help win this war?" to "What can we do to stop it?"

Liberty vs. safety

Re: Get serious about antiterror efforts, letter, July 8.

To the letter writer who proclaimed, "I'd rather lose some "rights' than lose my life," I'll allow someone far wiser and more eloquent than myself reply:

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

Will the letter writer dismiss Benjamin Franklin as just another spokesman for the "leftist media?"

Let them have the Middle East

Re: London bombings.

Why are we surprised? Al-Qaida continues to respond to our invasion of their territories. Sept. 11 was a direct result of the U.S. presence in the Middle East, and their continued activities are a response to our invasion of Iraq.

We had a chance to eradicate the threat if we had concentrated on Afghanistan, but we had to go after Saddam Hussein, who had nothing to do with 9/11. We diluted our effort against bin Laden and failed in the primary mission.

We must remove the incentive for them to continue! Let the Arabs handle the Middle East! They don't want us and they don't need us! We can't dictate the lifestyle of other societies. If they want democracy, let them fight for it as we did!

A Mideast contrast

The St. Petersburg Times front-page photo Israeli-vs.-Israeli confrontation in Gaza on July 1 provides an excellent example of the contrast between our democratic ally, Israel, and its questionable partner in the search for peace: Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas.

On one hand, in a very significant move toward peace, Israel's government has decided to withdraw from Gaza. Its democratic government is now enforcing that painful decision against its own militants. On the other hand, although elected leader Abbas had condemned violence and terrorism, he has yet to disarm the Hamas terrorists and the militias that seek to destroy democratic Israel. By action, not by words, will Abbas and the Palestinians be judged.

Anonymous sources are real threat

Re: A threat to the press and public, editorial, June 29.

A threat to the circulation and revenues of the press? Yes. A threat to the public? Emphatically no. I am the "public." I perceive the real threat as the possible use of an anonymous "source" by a newspaper or network in the propagation of its biased political/social agenda - left or right.

There is something inherently sleazy about the unnamed "source," whether he be real or a convenient contrivance. He lurks in the dark shadows, black cloak of anonymity pulled about his face, pointing a bony, accusing finger at the object of his malevolence. He is a faceless coward.

Everyone should have the right to know his or her accuser.

Obfuscating the issue

Re: Jailing of journalists would be unjust, June 30.

William Safire's column aside, someone at the White House did, with obvious malice, authorize and approve the public release and exposure of the name of a secret government agent. It is illegal to do this. In time of war, it is treason.

U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald seems to be purposely obfuscating and confusing the issues in this situation. God help America.

Go after Novak

Re: Outed CIA agent.

I wrote in a brief letter published Oct. 17, 2003 that "I hope that columnist Robert Novak is not protected by the media just because he is a journalist of long standing." Well, what do you know. The media are not protecting him, but someone in high places of government must be doing so, as Novak seems to have no fear of the special prosecutor.

It is so very obvious that the special prosecutor has gone after journalists who are on the margins of the story and is neglecting to pursue Novak, who knowingly exposed the name of the agent after being asked not to do so by the CIA.

What's going on here? Let's get the man that did the outing - not those that did followup research!

Her moral fiber is needed

Judith Miller of the New York Times, jailed for refusal to reveal sources in the leak/outing of Valerie Plame, has the moral fiber I wish was prevalent or even discernable in Washington today.

Let moderation prevail on court

Re: Bush's supporters expect a conservative court nominee, letter, July 6.

In response to the Times July 2 editorial Replacing O'Connor, the letter writer stated: "Please say what you mean. You believe the president should nominate a justice who believes in abortion on demand, excluding God from public life, and promoting the normalization of deviant sexual behavior."

No, the Times editorial was completely correct. The president should not choose someone of extreme minority beliefs, but one who is more attuned to the predominant moderate beliefs.

We were given freedom of religion and have kept religion out of the public square precisely for the reason the letter writer illustrates. No one's narrow ideas of morality should be shoved down the throats of those who do not share such narrow views.

The mud is at hand

Re: Summer of mudslinging, editorial, July 6.

The subheadline said, "The confirmation process for Sandra Day O'Connor's successor shouldn't degenerate into character assassination, but it will."

That should have been followed by: For example, see editorial cartoon to the right.

Taking a cue from Martinez?

Re: Maddox blames bookkeeper for errors, June 29.

There has been much discussion recently about Scott Maddox's judgment and leadership abilities, but the way he has handled the Democratic Party's financial problems calls into question his character as well.

Maddox has been recently quoted as saying that Democrats have "a horrible habit of eating their young," but he appears to be doing exactly that to Debbie Griffin-Bruton, the party official receiving all the blame for the Democrats' woes. Perhaps he noticed the success that Mel Martinez has had with his "blame-the-staff" approach.

As a Democrat, I do not find such scapegoating to be helpful. It only reveals Maddox's willingness to sacrifice someone else's reputation to ensure that nothing gets in the way of his ambitions.

No winners here

Re: Jury acquits ex-teacher of sex abuse, July 2.

July 1 was just another sad day for one teacher, two families and the Pinellas County schools, as well as for a community and public education. There were no "winners." In the final "judgment," the only truth will be that which each knows happened.

Mark Fronczak did, however, summarize an apparent educational situation when he said that "Everything males do is suspect." While schools are scrambling for "male role models" to serve the abundance of children without a stable male presence in their home environments, it appears the "knife cuts" the wrong way, often. There appears to be a dichotomy between need and practice.

It's due time that cameras are placed in every classroom. Just as on buses. Just as in many public places. That way everyone can "see" what happened, or didn't "happen."

P.S.: I am an educator.

A matter of moral discrimination

Re: No room for inclusive homeschool listing, by Rebecca Catalanello, June 30.

Hooray for Ted Pride, the Web master at www.home-school.com: "Not discriminating on sexual orientation basically means discriminating against most major religions, since the two are mutually exclusive."

The motivating factor of most homeschool participants is guarding our children from secular public schools that are rife with moral values different from what are held to be the Christian standard.

Also, I must point out that Ted Pride's last name made me feel good to associate the word "pride" with someone whom I respected rather than its usual connection to gay pride. I must love my neighbor, but I cannot condone sexually oriented practices against which my religion speaks out.

Parents must control TV viewing

Re: Pediatric studies on TV advise: Shut it off, July 5.

Some 30 years ago, while I was still in school, I wrote an essay on the perils of children watching too much TV. It seems as though nothing has changed.

Parents have got to stop using TV as a babysitter and take the responsibility for what their child is watching. They need to set stringent rules about what and how much these children are watching. No one in the TV industry cares what the children watch or about the after-effects on them.

Strive as they will, teacher/medical/child welfare organizations are not capable of successfully countering the existing system. America wonders and worries about the lack of students pursuing studies in mathematics, science and electronic engineering, but we remain unwilling partners to the TV world, and its negative effects. Parents cannot afford to wait on any institution to solve this on-going dilemma. They must address it themselves. Turn off the TV, and let the chips fall where they may. It is your child we are talking about.

Enjoy life's travels

Re: Airport security is a sham, letter, July 2.

On June 22 I flew to Chicago from Tampa International Airport. I'm 88 years old, walk with a cane and use a wheelchair. I never make any comments or complaints, and I'm treated very nicely. I make a lot of trips, visiting my children who work in different states.

Life is short. Enjoy each day and don't complain.

[Last modified July 9, 2005, 01:01:15]