Letters To The Editor


May 03, 2006

Leaks undermine vital security efforts

While I have in the past found fault with The Sun editorial board's political bias, the editorial "Too many secrets" (May 1) is beyond the pale.

In a blatant attempt to garner public support for government workers who illegally provide classified information (which you call "leaking") to the press, The Sun glosses over many facts that are damning to its position.

For instance, the editorial cites the case of Mary O. McCarthy, accused of telling "The Washington Post about secret CIA prisons in Eastern Europe." But far from being "benign, inane or venal," this program, along with the National Security Agency's intercepts of telephone calls between known or suspected terrorists overseas and a U.S. resident, are vital in the ongoing war on terror.

Revealing these secrets to the press materially interferes with U.S. intelligence-gathering and other operations.

Douglas Dribben


Arrogant dismissal of progress in Iraq

I compliment The Sun for three outstanding editorials on Friday, but I take great exception to one sentence in an otherwise excellent treatment of Iraq in which The Sun seemingly can't resist disparaging what it characterizes as the administration's "dismal performance in rebuilding the country" ("Iraq's Mr. al-Maliki," editorial, April 28).

In my opinion, The Sun undercuts its own analysis with such an arrogant dismissal of our work in the face of the barbaric and ruthless insurgency that our countrymen contend with every day on our behalf.

And I strongly suspect that many, if not most, of our personnel on the ground in Iraq would object to this "dismal performance" characterization, which ignores the steady progress being made in many parts of the country.

Dick Fairbanks


An eloquent account of the costs of war

Every single person who is concerned about the tremendous cost of the war in Iraq, and our government's apparent desire to run head-first into Iran, should read "The Long War posture" (Opinion * Commentary, April 26).

This eloquent commentary summarizes the many important reasons why our country cannot be in a perpetual war and, perhaps even more frighteningly, why certain government officials may actually want such a state of affairs.

We will definitely have the opportunity to throw these people out of the White House, but President Bush has another three years in office. In that time, he and his friends in high places can cause more damage to this country than is even imaginable.

I don't think there is a quick and easy answer to this enormous problem. But I do believe that the American people need to be more vigilant, more verbal and more insistent about what we want for ourselves and our country.

It is our responsibility to question our government when we believe it is making wrong and seriously flawed decisions.

It is our responsibility to make sure our government is indeed "of the people, by the people and for the people."

And it is our responsibility not to look the other way when the freedoms that we have worked so hard to achieve and maintain are being compromised and eliminated.

Barbara A. McNamara


Need new `decider,' not new explainer

President Bush introduced the new White House press secretary, Tony Snow, by saying that his job as president is to make decisions and Mr. Snow's job would be to explain those decisions.

Presumably, by appointing a new press secretary, Mr. Bush hopes to improve his dismal poll ratings.

Unfortunately, Mr. Bush fails to understand that the many crises we now face, and his low approval ratings, result from his decisions, not their explanation.

It's time for a new "decider," not a new explainer.

Eric F. Waller


Funny wake-up call on distracted drivers

Joel Stein's column "Call me after you hit something" (Opinion * Commentary, April 28) was one of the funniest things I have ever read.

Of course, as is the case with most humor, it is alarmingly accurate.

The number of people talking on their cell phone while driving continues to increase, and the number of inattentive drivers is climbing as well.

James Charvat


Sing our anthem in our language

The idea of "The Star-Spangled Banner" being sung in Spanish is both ludicrous and insulting ("Spanish-language anthem to support migrants," April 24).

Regardless of the ethnic or cultural group involved, performing "The Star-Spangled Banner" in any foreign language is as disrespectful as Roseanne Barr screeching her rendition of the national anthem while grabbing her crotch.

If people wish to attain citizenship in the United States, the least they can do is to learn to sing and appreciate our national anthem in the language it was written.

Doing otherwise is like being invited to a dinner party and bringing your own food.

Joseph M. Koper

Hunt Valley

Anthem's message works in any tongue

Like Shakespeare's plays, "The Star-Spangled Banner" tells a story with a message.

Baltimore Sun Articles
Please note the green-lined linked article text has been applied commercially without any involvement from our newsroom editors, reporters or any other editorial staff.