Letters to the editor

FIGHTING MOVES CLOSER

Sniping in the streets, blocking democracy and denying troops' purpose

Editor, The Times:

Your fine article, "Unit headed to Iraq is cheered" (Times, Local News, Nov. 16), clearly outlined the dangers "from within" that our Constitution warns us to defend against. Supporting family and friends who serve our country is great. The actions of some of those pro-war people outside Fort Lewis are not.

Using intimidation, threats, slanderous speech, and attempting to physically block American citizens from expressing their constitutional rights of free speech is exactly the opposite of what our troops are supposed to be fighting for. Those pro-war, pro-Bush anarchists either have never read the Bill of Rights or simply want to throw it away. True patriots are outraged by attempts to intimidate and harass those holding different opinions.

It is heartening that at least one local policeman on the scene understands what America really stands for, and told the bullies trying to block a patriotic American's way: "He has as much right to go where he wants as you do."

Why is it that those people waving the flag most fervently often seem to be the very ones using the most un-American, unpatriotic methods?
Larry Owens, Shoreline

Pin down in the capital

The fury directed at Iraq war protesters by its supporters seems ironic. Wrapped in red, white and blue, many of these supporters raise the rallying cry that the U.S. is on foreign soil to defend democracy. Yet, respecting the beliefs of others and acknowledging the right to express them without harassment are fundamental tenets of democracy that war supporters might recognize.

Another democratic imperative is the necessity to disagree with the policy set forth by the government, if you perceive your country is creating a grave error. I believe the U.S., upon its Iraqi invasion, set into motion disasters that it has not foreseen or found ways to solve.

I also feel a commitment to my children, who do not plan to enlist in military service, and whom I do not want to see drafted into combat, as existing forces become increasingly pressed.

This war requires solutions that cannot be found on the battlefield, or from the cockpits targeting missiles over Iraqi sites. It requires a vision of diplomacy and leadership that this administration has not shown the ability to offer. It requires us to demand leadership that is willing and able to serve the greater interest of our nation with means other than bullets and bombs.
Nancy Dickeman, Seattle

Head bowed, not broken

The few protesters who attended the Support Our Troops rally near Fort Lewis on Saturday were barking up the wrong tree. Instead of protesting the deployment of more of our young men and women, they should have been protesting the supporters of the war who truly endanger the lives of these soldiers.

"Not In Our Name," as well as all American citizens, should pray for the lives of all military personnel who are shipped off to Iraq.

Each week, more American soldiers return home with debilitating illnesses, or severe psychological damage. Hundreds have already been killed, and thousands have lost limbs. The rates of cancer, lymphoma and life-altering changes to the central nervous system amongst our returning troops is frighteningly high.

Pray for the safe return of our Fort Lewis troops and pray for the end of the most dangerous presidency in the history of this great nation.
Brent Stavig, Seattle

Terminate extreme prejudice

Regarding "Unit headed to Iraq is cheered," specifically about the "angry pro-occupation demonstrators," in all fairness, either refer to the other side as pro-Saddam demonstrators or leave your opinions on the op-ed pages.
Steve Baus, Seattle

Crossing the well-aware

Maybe Jennifer Atkins, holding the "No Protesters" sign ("Hundreds rally here for troops," page one photo, Nov. 16) is unaware of U.S. history, in particular the Declaration of Independence. She should check it out because I'm pretty sure it reads, "... it is their (the people's) Right, it is their (the people's) Duty, to throw off such a Government... "

And before that "... Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed, that when any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it... "

Political dissent is not unpatriotic and it is not against the troops.
Susan Schaffnit, Seattle

Quagmire deepens

I am writing to protest against Jennifer Atkins, pictured in The Times protesting against anti-war protesters. Atkins apparently believes she has more right to protest than others. Should she decide to protest against me, I would then feel obligated to protest in response, making me an anti-anti-anti-anti-anti-war protester.
Joe Sullivan, Kirkland

FEMININE MYSTIQUE

Venus on the half-self

It's amazing that an article on naked sushi ("Sushi in the raw: Restaurant's displays get women's group steamed," Local News, Nov. 11), brings out such strong opinions on the so-called "objectifying" of women in our culture, as though it's something being done unto women without their willing participation or consent ("Dinner Conversation," Northwest Voices, Nov. 15).

Time for everyone to wake up. Women are the biggest reason the objectification continues.

After decades of focus on the subject by vocal feminist groups and media attention to the subject, women are the biggest consumers of clothing, cosmetics, beauty services, cosmetic surgeries, and every other industry sprung up to support the demands of a culture obsessed with beauty, youth and sex.

It's very hard to convincingly argue that women are as smart and capable as their male counterparts, but are completely helpless to stop participating in their own denigration. You can't possibly expect anyone to really believe that every gorgeous, artificially enhanced female showing off her body for money or privilege has been oppressed and downtrodden by the men in her life to the point where she has no brain left with which to make her own decisions.

Fact is, as a career, it's a lot easier than getting your Ph.D. and trying to actually contribute something meaningful with your life.
Allison Barrett, Seattle

ENTRY POSITION

Soft where enhanced

I had not heard the usage McJob around here ("Merriam-Webster to McDonald's: 'McJob' is here to stay," News, Nov. 11). We just call it flipping burgers. But Merriam-Webster may be right. Maybe the word is more prevalent elsewhere.

Let us add another word to the English language. How about MicJob? Meaning "a high paying Microsoft job" with free pop and stock awards. (Ignore the worthless stock options for now!)

Make a note, Merriam-Webster: You saw it in The Seattle Times first.
Arun Nisargand, Bellevue