Letters to the Editor
Since the San Jose Mercury News has chosen NOT to publish any of my letters
to the editor opposing the invasion of Iraq, I will publish them here..
Dear Editor,
Lou Catallo (Letters, May 1) writes that Dixie Chicks's fans "tend to be conservative, love their country and have a deep respect for American institutions." Do they fail to note how the Bush administration betrays traditional conservative values, i.e., fiscal responsibility, and destroys those very institutions that make this country great, i.e., through increased domestic surveillance, secret military tribunals, imprisoning citizens without due process, etc.? Or maybe Catallo simply got it wrong. Maybe they don't have a deep respect for American institutions, maybe they just have a shallow allegiance to right wing symbols and rhetoric.
Sincerely,
Elaine Rose
Dear Editor,
Dear Editor, So now the Weapons of Mass Destruction are in Syria? It's like that old con game, "Pick which shell the pea is under." Of course the con is that the pea is not under any of the shells. In fact, there is no pea. Or in this case, no peace.
Sincerely,
Elaine Rose
Dear Editor,
Now that our quick victory in Iraq has shown that the United States posesses absolute miltary power, it would be prudent for us to consider the old maxim, "Absolute power corrupts absolutely." In fact, why not ponder the entire quotation: "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men." ATTRIBUTION:John Emerich Edward Dalberg, 1st Baron Acton (1834–1902).
Sincerely,
Elaine Rose
Dear Editor,
Dear Editor, People should not be so upset about the mess Iraq is in just now. Remember, this is only our first unprovoked invasion. We will get better at this as we overthrow the evil regimes in Syria, Iran, North Korea.. and on.. and on..
Sincerely,
Elaine Rose
Dear Editor,
I thought Richard Perle resigned so he could profiteer from his war of unprovoked aggression? But here he is back again in your editorial pages (4/11, page 9C) flogging his theory that victory in Iraq spells the end for the United Nations. His theory does not hold up, at least not yet. Until we find the vast underground factories producing Weapons of Mass Destruction, and the promised mobile weapons labs, and the thousands of drums of weapons-ready chemicals and biologics, and the missile delivery systems.. You know, all those WMD that Saddam was ready and willing to use? (Apparently Saddam was saving them for a threat more serious than our little invasion.) Until we find them, it would seem that the U.N. was entirely correct: the inspections worked. As former U.N. Chief Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter has been telling us all along.
Sincerely,
Elaine Rose
Actually, they did publish this one!
Dear Editor,
Isn't it interesting that supporters of the war see televised images of a few tens of cheering Iraquis and conclude that Iraq welcomes our "liberation." Yet the pictures of tens of thousands of Americans protesting against the war said nothing important to them about our own nation's convictions. I guess it just goes to show, we believe what we want to believe.
Sincerely,
Elaine Rose
Dear Editor,
Like many, I find great comfort in the fact that our
duly appointed leader is a man of religious convictions. May I
suggest a prayer which Mr. Bush can use today, and every day for
the rest of his life? "Dear God, Please forgive me for the
destruction I have wrought, the many deaths I have caused, and
the countless lives I have destroyed. And most of all, I beg
your forgiveness that in comission of these acts, I have
invoked your sacred name." Amen.
Sincerely,
Elaine Rose
Dear Editor,
If we are really concerned about weapons of mass destruction which might be used by terrorists in the United States, why don't we begin by eliminating those which we know the terrorists actually use? Of course that would be Ryder trucks and 747 commercial aircraft. This can be accomplished without regime change, or collateral damage, or $75 billion supplemental spending bills. And it will be about equally as effective in making us safer as the will the conquest of Iraq--which is to say, not very effective at all.
Sincerely,
Elaine Rose
Dear Fellow Americans,
Please stop waving the banner of freedom while our federal government locks up its citizens for growing state-sanctioned medicinal marijuana and for selling pipes and bongs. Do not preach about the sanctity of human life while we continue to execute our fellow citizens, guilty and innocent alike. Please do not proclaim the virtues of democracy while our court-appointed President scorns the heart-felt pleas of millions of anti-war protesters as nothing more than a focus group. We may indeed live in the greatest nation in the world, but this administration can hardly lay claim to the moral high ground.
Sincerely,
Elaine Rose
Dear Editor,
Colin Powell's 90 minute presentation to the United Nations Security
Council made me laugh. Or should I cry? This is supposed to be the
evidence which justifies going to war? In my career in high tech, I have
often participated in program reviews that lasted a full day or longer.
Couldn't we take a day or a week or a month, whatever it takes, to review all the evidence to decide about a war? Mr. Powell gave examples of evidence he claims the U.S. government has, and asked us to believe that there is plenty more where that came from. He even kindly put them into context for us, with no evidence that the context was accurate. I'm
sorry, Mr. Powell, but that's not good enough. I found this presentation
to be no more convincing than the prior party line: "Trust us."
That great Repulican hero Ronald Reagan said, "Trust, but verify." So I will apply the Reagan principal and continue to repeat what the American public and the world has been demanding for months: If you have the evidence, show it to us--all of it. Put up, or shut up!
Sincerely,
Elaine Rose
Dear Editor,
United Nations Security Council Resolution 1441 gave Iraq two choices: disarm voluntarily, or face disarmament by force. When I was in second grade, a bully gave me two choices: give him my lunch money, or he would beat me up. Neither bully is morally justified. Logicians will immediately recognize the fallacy of limited choices.
Sincerely,
Elaine Rose
Dear Editor,
We all hope and pray that this morally unjustified war with Iraq may be prosecuted as quickly and with as little destruction and loss of life as possible. But I worry that if the victory comes easily, will Mr. Bush be encouraged to line up another target in the sights of his six-gun? Who is next? Iran? North Korea? France?
Sincerely,
Elaine Rose
Dear Editor,
The terrorist networks thrive because they are decentralized, operating with a myriad of independent cells. It doesn't seem very smart to me to organize a huge centralized bureaucracy--the Department of Homeland Security--to fight them! Fight fire with fire, I believe they say?
Sincerely,
Elaine Rose
Dear Editor,
Ronald Reagan's finest hour was when he demanded, "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!" Why isn't George W. Bush demanding, "Mr. Sharon, stop building that wall!", the new wall being Israel's so-called 'security fence'?
Sincerely,
Elaine Rose