Print

Email story

Comment

Email editor

Compromising our humanitarian values would be a disaster

Re: They compromised away our basic values, editorial, Sept. 24.

Our commitment to our American values is being tested now. Are we a country of humanitarians, or not? Despite the Supreme Court ruling in June that the president did not have the authority to set up military tribunals at Guantanamo and that the "military commissions" there are illegal under the Geneva Conventions, the administration is getting around that by pushing Congress to rewrite legislation, specifically, the War Crimes Act.

Sens. John McCain, John Warner and Lindsey Graham made a brief stand against this. As described in Sunday's editorial, they've already folded and accepted a "compromise" that lets the president interpret the Geneva Conventions the way he wants. That could be disastrous for our reputation abroad and for our soldiers' safety.

If you think torture will only be used on "the bad guys," Google "Maher Arar." Also consider that the Patriot Act II would make it easy to take citizenship away from an American who is construed to support terrorism. Then consider how this administration responds to dissent: "War critics are aiding the terrorists."

We are supposed to set the standard for human rights and the rule of law. If the United States stops observing the Geneva Conventions, other countries will as well. What kind of a world do we want to live in? Please call or write our senators and ask them not to move forward on any legislation that does not uphold the core American values of humanity and fair process.

Maria Cohn, Tampa

Party loyalty beats values

Re: They compromised away our basic values.

Thank you for your lead editorial clearly describing the ramifications of this "compromise." After all the sound and fury, the final outcome reveals that loyalty to party trumps loyalty to our nation's fundamental values.

The rapid turnaround by the three senators suggests that this entire episode was nothing more than a sham designed to convince the public that there were at least some members of Congress willing to stand for what was correct. Now we have, astonishingly, granted the president the prerogative to ignore not only the international treaties to which we are signatories, but also our own laws banning torture and human rights violations.

We have indeed dispensed with two basic values that define a civilized society, complying with the law of the land and our sense of morality. The result is that we have now placed our own soldiers at risk for similar treatment by their captors.

Jack Sandler, Tampa

Terrorism on the march

Re: Report: Iraq war has stirred terrorism, Sept. 24.

Lost on Page 13A of Sunday's St. Petersburg Times was an article on the amazing story of a 16-intelligence-agency report that the Iraq war is stirring up more terrorism. The spy agency report was particularly timely coming just days after the fifth anniversary of 9/11, when the administration dominated the news with claims that the world is now safer. The Bush administration had to know about this report before the 9/11 commemoration because the report was completed by the Pentagon in April. The story said the report "asserts that Islamic radicalism, rather than being in retreat, metastasized and spread across the globe."

During this fall election, the administration likely will again claim the country is safer since 9/11. Facts to the contrary have not deterred them from staying with their basic message. Bush has done an excellent job in creating a sense of fear that overshadows all other feeling in a country that was once known as "the land of the free and the home of the brave."

William M. Domin, Palm Harbor

Reluctant Iraqi troops

Re: General says Baghdad needs more Iraqi troops, Sept. 23.

Did I read this correctly? The article quotes Maj. Gen. James Thurman as saying that "due to the distance, (Iraqi troops) did not want to travel into Baghdad."

So we are asking 147,000 U.S. soldiers to travel thousands of miles from their homes to Iraq, yet the Iraqi soldiers refuse to travel the few miles from their homes to Baghdad? If there ever was a reason to bring our troops home now, this has to be it.

Richard Feigel, Clearwater

Stark facts on Iraq

Suppose it takes another five years to successfully install a democratic government in Iraq. And let us suppose the U.S. casualties ultimately reach 10,000 by that time. Will the cost in U.S. deaths have been worth the effort to "democratize" Iraq? If so, I guess we could all cheer when (and if) that day comes. However, if the cost in American lives is not worth the bloody effort, when will we bring our young men and women home? With the current death toll approaching 3,000 and no visible retreat by the insurgents, perhaps we need to reassess the importance of a democratic Iraq.

The stark facts continue to be ignored by the current administration: The Iraqis did not welcome us as "liberators" after Saddam Hussein's fall; they view us with continued suspicion because we are "Westerners"; they see us as an "occupational force"; and finally, their religion continues to influence their world view. In that view, their society is regulated by Islamic law, not Western ideas like freedom or democracy. It is entirely possible that no amount of American casualties can ever change those facts.

Jack Karpan, New Port Richey

Bill Clinton's candid talk

Re: Bill Clinton's interview on Fox.

Hooray for Bill Clinton. He had the nerve to tell his interviewer just what most thoughtful people would have. He was harassed during his terms in office by the right wing, and in spite of this was able to bring our country out of the debt incurred by Ronald Reagan and the first George Bush. Our nation was respected throughout most of the world.

Now, Fox News (which spins news to try to make the right-wingers look good) tries to lie about his record on terrorism. I'm proud he had the courage to tell them on live TV just what he thinks of them. He has been very gracious and has tried to help the Bush administration, and this is what he gets?

Gordon Parsons, St. Petersburg

Beware that wagging finger

Bill Clinton wagging his finger. Uh oh, we'd all better watch out! The 1993 attack on the World Trade Center must not have happened on Clinton's watch, nor the October 2000 suicide assault on the USS Cole.

The question is, What did this Democrat president do after both of these incidents to shield our country from Osama bin Laden and other unscrupulous terrorist killers? Clinton was in office for eight years and, truth be told, we all know what he did - nothing! Good for Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice on challenging this proven liar.

Kevin B. Kamen, Palm Harbor

Downsizing on the caffeine front

Starbucks Corp. announced on Sept. 21 that it will boost its retail coffee prices by a nickel a cup on Oct. 3. The company shouldn't fret. The retail grocery industry's distress about coffee price increases many years ago disappeared as consumers watched the former 1-pound coffee can gradually decrease by fractional ounces to a standard 11.5-ounce bag.

Starbucks can reduce the size of its coffee cup by an appropriate amount. So, if a "pounda Java" is no longer a pound, a "cuppa" need not be a cup.

Victor Morgan, St. Petersburg

[Last modified September 27, 2006, 02:07:35]